Although unarticulated, there seems to be a growing consensus within certain circles that every societal problem, no matter how minor, could be solved if only the American people had less anonymity.
One of the most obvious examples is law enforcement’s widespread adoption of automatic license plate readers, a type of surveillance system that tracks individuals via their vehicle’s license plate. Often, the initial pitch is that the devices can help investigate serious crimes such as murders, armed robberies, and kidnappings. But then, at some point, they’re defended on the grounds that they help recover stolen vehicles a little faster. And the next thing anyone knows, they’re being used for residency checks and to look into noise complaints.
Recommended Stories
Similarly, major retail chains are getting their own ALPRs and continuing to expand their implementation of facial recognition, claiming the devices help cut down on retail theft. In June, for example, Lowe’s made the news when a North Carolina media outlet reported that the home improvement chain not only uses ALPRs but shares data collected at stores in that state, as well as South Carolina and Virginia, with North Carolina law enforcement. The following month, Grocery Outlet, a California grocery chain, gained media attention for its use of facial recognition.
Hence, not only is your vehicle tracked on the way to the grocery store, but you may be individually identified once you walk inside.
Yet, this crackdown on anonymity is by no means limited to police work and retail loss prevention. Explicit identity checks and biometric scans, which really are only one step away from being an identity check even when not being used for that purpose, are popping up as the go-to solution for all sorts of problems — big, small, and illusory.
Soon, all new cars in the United States are going to be required to have a system that uses a camera to monitor the driver continually for signs of drunk or distracted driving that prevents the driver from starting the vehicle, or at least limits its functionality, if such impairments are detected. (The only reason this isn’t a requirement already is because a system that does this well doesn’t really exist yet, so the date keeps getting pushed back.)
Additionally, the Federal Communications Commission may soon require American citizens to present a government ID to get a phone line as a means to tackle the problem of foreign robocalls. (The logic doesn’t quite make sense, but the elimination of burner phones is considered an added bonus.)
And, politicians at practically every level of government are looking to address seemingly overblown concerns regarding the effects of social media on childhood mental health by rushing to pass age-gating laws that, in some places, could result in adults being required to present a government ID or submit to a face scan not just to have a social media account but even to download a news app.
OPINION: YOUR CAR IS BEING TRACKED WITHOUT A WARRANT. TWO REPUBLICANS ARE ENDING THE DRAGNET
In all these cases, concerns about privacy, accuracy, abuse, and possible chilling effects on lawful actions and speech are treated as secondary, if not obstacles in the way of more important goals. Sometimes such concerns are even treated as exclusive to criminals.
However, it’s important to remember we live in a free country that owes a lot to the ability of its people to read, write, speak, and move about anonymously. This was especially true during our Founding Era and the civil rights movement. It remains true now. Furthermore, if you can’t go to the grocery store or read the news on your phone (let alone attend a political rally or protest) without being identified, it makes one wonder whether we even have a free country anymore.
Daniel Nuccio is an independent journalist and a spring 2026 College Fix fellow. He is a regular contributor to the College Fix and the Brownstone Institute. He earned his doctorate in biology in 2025.