States split on use of cameras for traffic safety enforcement
Red light and speed cameras are typically permitted by state law and city, county, or area ordinances. Their use, however, is not ubiquitous.
The spread of these automatic traffic enforcement cameras—especially red light cameras—has received major backlash. Critics say the cameras are an example of policing for profit or that they don't do enough to protect pedestrians.
Eight states prohibit red light cameras, and the same number doesn't allow speed cameras. Both types are illegal in six states: Maine, Mississippi, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Texas, and West Virginia. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a ban into law in 2019 after years of opposing them as the state's attorney general. His office cited a study by two economics professors who determined that red light cameras increased rear-end accidents—a common complaint from opponents. On the other hand, a study by the IIHS showed that red light cameras reduce fatal crashes at monitored intersections.
Prior to the Texas ban, red light cameras in the city of Plano drove accidents down by a third and simultaneously raised money for trauma centers and traffic safety programs. State police officials had also supported the cameras.
Bias is another point of contention in automated traffic enforcement. Proponents say that cameras are equitable, as they follow consistent rules and apply the same repercussions for all vehicles running red lights or speeding, eliminating any prejudiced application of laws by police officers.
However, the issue of where cameras are placed can still contribute to and reinforce discrimination in law enforcement. For instance, a ProPublica series—backed up by University of Illinois Chicago research—found that Chicago's automated red light and speed camera programs disproportionately ticketed Black and Latino motorists, with dire financial consequences. Meanwhile, the city of Rochester, New York, ended a six-year red light camera program in 2016 after determining that it unevenly fined low-income residents.
Comments