Important legal opinion

Regular readers of Pajama Guy must pardon me as I will be incommunicado for a few days. However, I'm sure Pajama Guy himself and (chortle) ChicagoGuy will pick up the slack.

I was asked to give my expert opinion regarding constitutional challenges to moving violations. It's not that I'm a legal expert, but I am pretty knowledgeable about traffic tickets.

First we must ask if someone who gets a ticket has any constitutional rights at all. Thankfully, yes--for instance, you're still presumed innocent and the state must makes its case. However, traffic tickets are considered petty offenses, which, because of the relative insignificance of the crime and punishment, means you don't get all the rights anyone accused of a misdemeanor or felony expects. (Petty offenses are actually a sub-group of misdemeanors but for our purposes can be treated as a separate category). Generally speaking, a summary proceeding is considered sufficient to take care of your case.

I actually remember when I first moved to Los Angeles the Libertarian Party had found some loophole in the ticketing system. I don't remember what their argument was--maybe some sort of lack of due process. Anyway, if you sent them a fee, they'd have the offense wiped off your record. Eventually, however, the local government got wise and closed this loophole.

Have other attempts been made to challenge the constitutionality of tickets? Yes, but just about all fail. In fact, unless you get a helpful judge, most probably you'll get laughed out of court. If you troll around the internet I'm sure you'll find some websites where people believe the whole system is unconstitutional, but their arguments, like those saying the income tax is illegal, are generally the work of those who are not properly versed in law and, sometimes, out and out crackpots.

A reader brought up some potential objections.

1. Federal versus state jurisdiction: No good. Even if highways were created by the federal government, I'm sure the police already know where they're allowed to make traffic stops. (And if you're running from state cops, you'll find you can't duck into a federal building and declare sanctuary.)

2. Due process: "Due Process" is a vague term that you can always fling at the prosecution. However, because, as noted above, petty offenses don't receive complete due process other crimes get, this is a very weak claim. As to the inconvenience of traffic court in another state (I've faced this problem too), this is not a due process problem. If you're accused of committing a crime in foreign state, they can try you there, and yes, it is very inconvenient. Sorry. Even if you think the cops were unfair, your recourse is to fight it in court. I suppose you can call the court and see if you can make a deal.

3. Interstate commerce clause: This is a non-starter. Even if states have "speed traps" to get out-of-staters, I don't think it matters to Commerce Clause jurisprudence.

4. Unequal enforcement: There's actually something here. If you can show that the states prosecute infractions at grossly disproportionate levels, you might have a case. (I believe some civil rights groups have looked into disproportionate rates at which African-Americans are pulled over.) However, the research would be so costly and time-consuming, I can't imagine anyone would undertake it rather than pay a ticket.

Anyway, don't let me rain on your parade. It's just my opinion. But, basically, the system is set up to keep the roads safe and the revenue streaming. Neither the state courts, nor the legislatures, are likely to dismantle it. However, it's not hard to fight a ticket and win. That's your best bet. Or, just pay it.