ACLU Challenges Minneapolis “Photo Cop” Ordinance (12/15/2005)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: media@aclu.org
MINNEAPOLIS – The American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota filed a motion
today seeking to have the Minneapolis Automated Traffic Enforcement Ordinance
invalidated as a violation of Minnesota state law and the Constitution.
“This ordinance presumes that the owner of a vehicle that is photographed is
guilty and then puts the burden on the owner to prove that he or she was not the
driver,” said ACLU of Minnesota Executive Director Chuck Samuelson. “It
turns the notion of due process on its head.”
The motion was filed on behalf of an individual who received a citation
because his vehicle was alleged to have violated the ordinance. The Minneapolis
ordinance at issue (nicknamed “Stop on Red”) was adopted last year and the city
began mailing citations to vehicle owners in July.
The city installed traffic light cameras at some intersections designed to
photograph vehicles that violate traffic laws by running red lights. The
cameras take three photographs. The first is that of the vehicle prior to
entering the intersection, the second photograph is of the intersection during
the red light and the third photograph is a close-up picture of the vehicle
license plate. The cameras do not record the faces of drivers and
passengers. Because the cameras do not record the faces of drivers, the
city is be unable to determine who was driving the vehicle when it ran the red
light. The city has amended their traffic ordinance to state that the owner of a
motor vehicle that is detected going through a red light by the camera system is
guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
The ordinance provides for only limited means of rebutting that presumption –
prove that you sold the vehicle and give the city the name of the new owner or
prove that that the vehicle was reported stolen before the date of the
violation.
The ACLU of Minnesota said that the Minneapolis “Photo Cop” ordinance
is invalid because it deprives vehicle owners of the right to due process and it
conflicts with Minnesota statutes governing traffic laws. In Minnesota
petty misdemeanor prosecutions, the prosecutor has the burden of proof to show
that an individual is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But the “Photo Cop”
ordinance reverses the burden of proof and requires the owner to prove that they
were not the driver of the vehicle that was photographed going through the red
light.
In addition, Minnesota prohibits local traffic regulations from being in
conflict with state law. The ACLU charges that the Minneapolis ordinance
conflicts with state law because it shifts liability for traffic light
violations from the driver to the owner. During the 2001 and 2003
legislative sessions, the Minnesota Legislature considered and rejected bills
that would have allowed local governments to use automated cameras to enforce
traffic regulations.
The motion to dismiss is scheduled to be heard in Hennepin County District
Court on December 21 at 1:30 a.m. It will be argued by ACLU of Minnesota
volunteer attorneys Howard Bass and Chad Fancher.
|