By Special to the Vanguard
VALLEJO, CA — A long-time Vallejo small business owner and civic participant has formally petitioned the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California to investigate what she describes as a severe, multi-year campaign of municipal overreach, unlawful surveillance, and systemic civil rights violations by local authorities in Solano County.
Susan B. Anthony, who has raised a specialized breed of American dogs for over a decade, submitted a formal letter and timeline of events to the ACLU after being directed to the civil rights organization by field representatives from Congressman John Garamendi’s office.
The complaint outlines how a neighborhood dispute stemming from an accidental dog escape spiraled into criminal prosecution under California Penal Code § 597(b) (People v. Susan B. Anthony, Case No. F25-00692) and led to what Anthony alleges is a relentless pattern of official retaliation by local county agencies. While initially charged as a felony, the case was subsequently reduced to a misdemeanor in Solano County Superior Court.
However, the core issues detailed in Anthony’s filing extend far beyond a localized animal control dispute. Her complaint raises broader constitutional concerns regarding Fourth Amendment privacy rights, municipal workarounds to judicial warrants, pre-conviction DNA collection, and sub-standard conditions within the Solano County Jail system—issues that legal advocates argue directly affect the broader public.
Unwarranted AI Surveillance via Planning Permits
Among the most alarming allegations in the ACLU submission is the claim that Solano County authorities bypassed standard judicial processes to institute targeted surveillance on her private property. According to the complaint, on or about March 11, 2024, local officials exploited an administrative planning permit to install a Flock Safety automated license plate reader (ALPR) and surveillance camera directly onto property owned by Anthony in a rural Solano County neighborhood with fewer than 20 residents.
Anthony asserts that by filtering the camera installation through the local planning department rather than seeking a judicial search warrant, county officials circumvented standard notice triggers, denying affected property owners their due process right to oppose the installation. The filing notes a startling administrative anomaly: when Anthony went to the local planning department to contest the permit, officials initially denied that any permit had been issued—until Anthony read aloud the property address listed on the document, which matched the very planning office and building in which they were standing.
The letter alleges the placement was not a routine traffic measure but a targeted mechanism to track Anthony’s movements, claiming authorities leveraged the camera feed to monitor her absence from the property to execute search warrants while she was away. This practice, Anthony’s petition argues, sets a dangerous precedent for local governments attempting to construct automated tracking networks without probable cause or judicial oversight.
Pre-Conviction DNA Extraction and Holiday Administrative Hearings
The complaint further details procedural irregularities and coercive law enforcement tactics during Anthony’s encounters with local authorities.
Following an arrest on June 28, 2024, Anthony alleges she was subjected to forced genetic sampling via a buccal cheek swab while incarcerated, despite maintaining the presumption of innocence for a non-violent, simple negligence charge. Law enforcement personnel reportedly claimed that state protocol mandates DNA collection for anyone booked on a felony charge.
Anthony’s legal position highlights a growing civil liberties debate: the state’s pre-conviction seizure and retention of genetic profile data without a specific nexus or compelling justification violates fundamental privacy and property rights over one’s own genetic information—particularly when underlying charges are ultimately reduced to misdemeanors.
The petition also challenges Solano County’s administrative scheduling practices. On June 19, 2024 (Juneteenth)—a recognized state and federal court holiday—Anthony was ordered to appear for an administrative dog hearing conducted by a law enforcement officer rather than a judicial officer. Anthony formally objected, citing both the statutory prohibition against holding court proceedings on legal holidays and the constitutional conflict of forcing a criminal defendant into a non-judicial administrative forum where standard criminal defense protections are absent.
Allegations of Deplorable Jail Conditions and Radiation Exposure
The final sections of the ACLU petition outline severe allegations regarding treatment and facility conditions at the Solano County Jail (500 Union Avenue, Fairfield, CA) during an arrest and incarceration at the local jail on a Ramey warrant between July 10 and July 14, 2025.
During intake, Anthony reports being placed in a lineup and ordered into a room to stand directly adjacent to an active X-ray body scanning machine operated by staff displaying no visible credentials or safety certifications. The filing notes that the following day, Anthony experienced severe physical distress, including intense pelvic burning sensations, followed by persistent joint clicking and hip pain when sitting—raising concerns about the unregulated use of radiation technology on pretrial detainees.
Beyond intake procedures, the petition describes jail conditions that failed to meet basic humane standards:
- Temperature and Clothing: Detainees held in freezing cells wearing only basic t-shirts, with requests for extra clothing denied, preventing sleep.
- Communication Barriers: Inoperable or malfunctioning phone systems with inaccurate operating instructions, posing severe hurdles for neuro-divergent individuals trying to contact legal counsel or families.
- Nutrition and Water: Substandard food offerings lacking basic nutritional or ingredient disclosures, alongside drinking water that tasted heavily of industrial sediment and reclaimed water.
Requested Remedies: Systemic Reform for the Public Interest
In her petition, Anthony requests that the ACLU of Northern California initiate systemic legal action, affirmative challenges, or class-action litigation to address these practices across Solano County and set statewide precedents:
- Surveillance Regulation: Establish clear legal prohibitions against municipalities using administrative planning permits to deploy Flock Safety or AI surveillance cameras on private property without a warrant, enforcing Fourth Amendment rights and Article I, Section 1 of the California Constitution.
- Injunctions on Genetic Collection: Challenge state and local frameworks mandating pre-conviction DNA extraction for non-violent offenses rooted in simple negligence theories.
- Court Holiday Protections: Enforce strict compliance prohibiting administrative bodies from compelling criminal defendants to attend hearings on state and federal holidays.
- Jail Condition Reforms: Enjoin the uncertified use of X-ray radiation scanners on pretrial detainees and establish mandatory operational standards at the Solano County Jail regarding temperature control, functional communications access, and basic dietary transparency.
What the Public Should Be Concerned With
While the catalyst for this legal battle was a local municipal dispute, the issues raised in Anthony’s filing touch on civil liberty vulnerabilities that impact all residents:
- Erosion of the Fourth Amendment: If municipal planning departments can serve as a backdoor to install permanent AI monitoring cameras on private property without a judge’s signature, routine property oversight can easily be weaponized into warrantless state surveillance.
- Expansion of the Genetic Dragnet: The systematic collection of biological data from unconvicted individuals charged with non-violent offenses creates an ever-expanding government database of citizens who are legally presumed innocent.
- Institutional Accountability in Detention Facilities: Unregulated radiation screening, non-functional communication systems for neurodivergent individuals, and unsafe food and water standards inside local jails represent systemic due process failures that threaten basic human rights.
As Solano County courts continue to process People v. Susan B. Anthony, the ACLU of Northern California has been urged to intervene to ensure that municipal enforcement mechanisms remain bound by state and federal constitutional limits.
To comment please go to one of these social media platforms:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DavisVanguard
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/peoples-vanguard-of-davis-inc/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/davisvanguard/
X: https://x.com/davisvanguard
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/vanguardnewsgroup.bsky.social
Subscribe to the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
