"The OPD (Oakland PD) didn’t share information directly with the federal agencies. Rather, other California police departments searched Oakland’s system on behalf of federal counterparts more than 200 times —
So the headline is misleading. It seems like oakland made their records available to state agencies like CHP, and one of those agencies queried the records and shared the query results with federal agencies.
And the article doesn't specify which results were shared.
So it's clear Oakland didn't violate the law, and there is reasonable doubt that the other agencies didn't violate the law either.
That’s not what is happening here. They shared the records with state agencies legally. And the other agencies may have shared permissible results legally too
Sure, and as a teacher I can post my answer key out where others who are "legally" allowed access can view them.
They are sharing the records with the knowledge that they are being sent to ICE. They could choose to stop sharing the records, but have not. They are culpable in the moral failure.
legality is not a strong argument for morality. still, we have constitutional protections against things like warrantless search and seizure, which many would argue that these activities violate.
edited to add -
you said, "Judgements [sic] come from judges, not journalists". however, this reporting - like other good investigative journalism - could lead to a suit from EFF or ACLU to stop this from happening.
And people are disagreeing with you because it's not legal. From TFA:
"California police are prohibited from sharing data from automated license plate readers with out-of-state and federal agencies."
If license plate data was sent to ICE, that's a violation of the law. Sometimes it takes journalism to uncover illegal activities. Depending on how the consequences take place, more scrutiny or civic action may be needed.
But dismissing this as saying "nearly every US law enforcement agency does plate reading" is fatalistic, and in this case, ignorant of the legality.
