Trace your commute

Tracking explained

License plate reader laws: Kentucky, Virginia, NC and Illinois

Primary-source examples from Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina and Illinois: retention, use, sharing and policy requirements. Other states remain unreviewed.

Guide reviewed .

What is covered

This review covers Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina and Illinois. An unlisted state has not been reviewed here; that does not mean it has no relevant law. State statutes, constitutional decisions, agency rules and vendor terms answer different questions. Read the linked laws for definitions, exclusions and exceptions.

Kentucky: KRS 189.632

Effective July 15, 2026, this section addresses allowed uses, retention and sharing. It requires a public written agency policy covering such subjects as retention, training, oversight, access and an audit process every 90 days. Its retention exceptions are consequential, so the statute should not be reduced to a blanket 90-day deletion claim. Source.

Virginia: Code 2.2-5517

This section governs covered law-enforcement ALPR systems. It restricts use and sharing, separates a 21-day system-data schedule from a two-year audit-trail schedule, and includes ongoing-case preservation exceptions. Some traffic and non-criminal-justice uses are outside the section's scope. Source.

North Carolina: written policies and restricted uses

G.S. 20-183.31 requires a written agency policy before operation, covering databases, retention, sharing, training, oversight, security, auditing and outside-system access. Covered data use is limited to law-enforcement purposes and excludes traffic-violation enforcement. Source.

North Carolina: retention and disclosure

G.S. 20-183.32 sets a 90-day baseline with preservation-request and warrant exceptions. Preservation requests have a one-year period that can reset with another qualifying request. Covered plate data is confidential, with limited law-enforcement disclosure; this does not establish the status of every contract or policy document. Source.

Check which systems the law covers

North Carolina defines mobile and fixed ALPR systems in G.S. 20-183.30, while excluding specified traffic-control photographic and open-road tolling systems. A rule about one category should not be applied to every roadside camera. Source.

Illinois: restrictions on use and out-of-state sharing

The codified 625 ILCS 5/2-130 restricts selling, sharing, access or transfers for investigations or enforcement of laws interfering with the right to obtain reproductive or other defined lawful health care, or permitting detention or investigation based on immigration status. Out-of-state law-enforcement sharing requires a written declaration against those prohibited uses. Private readers are covered to the extent their data is shared with law enforcement. Source.

Illinois: a retention proposal is not a statewide rule

SB3257 proposes a five-year retention framework with archiving conditions. The official status checked on 2026-10-23 lists its last action as May 22, 2026, a re-referral to Assignments. That bill status does not establish an enacted five-year rule. The codified section and applicable agency policies must be read separately. Source.

Separate enacted text from proposals

A bill title, news report or legislative proposal is not enough to establish the current rule. Follow the enacted or codified text and its effective date. A later proposal can discuss a change without having changed the law. Local agency policy should be checked alongside the statute.

Read a local example next

The agency directory links original policy documents. Those records help connect the statewide framework to an operator's stated access and retention practices. They do not establish the full set of sharing partners or prove day-to-day compliance.

Questions and answers

Is this a 50-state legal survey?

No. Reviewed examples are Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina and Illinois. An unlisted state is unreviewed here, not necessarily unregulated.

Does a state rule prove every local camera complies?

No. A legal requirement and evidence of actual operation or compliance are different things.

Sources

Keep exploring

Open the camera map

All guides