The first and last sentences of the linked article summarizes just exactly what was declared “unconstitutional” …. From the Article:

“A federal judge in Oklahoma has ruled that a law enforcement officer violated a woman’s Fourth Amendment rights by searching her vehicle’s history through Flock Safety’s license-plate reader network without obtaining a warrant first.”

“According to the court, the deputy had no clear investigative justification for running the plate other than the fact that the vehicle was from California.”

The impact on the deployment, the use and databases of the Flock Cameras = ZERO

It is the POLICE OFFICER who is in trouble for violating the rights of the subject of his search using the flock data Base without a warrant.

For the time being … The database of the Flock Cameras is being treated like Cell Phone and Social Media Databases, which require warrants and more to access.

The Cameras and data bases are LEGAL and not under attack for the time being..

The Judge DID NOT rule “Flock Camera Searches unconstitutional”.

The judge DID Rule that a search of the Flock Camera DATABASE. without a WARRANT, violated the 4th Amendment rights of the person whom was the subject of the search.

This ruling has zero impact on the constitutionality of the existence and deployment of the cameras nor their databases.