WA Initiative Would Let Voters Ban Traffic Cameras
The state Supreme Court ruled they have no right to a say
Photo enforcement firms might have thought they won in Washington when the state's highest court ruled voters had no right to vote on whether red light cameras or speed cameras could be used in their community. In the 5-4 decision handed down in March (view ruling), the majority insisted the legislature only authorized city councils to make such decisions, not members of the electorate. Voters could overturn that decision next year.
Initiative mastermind Tim Eyman, who lost the legal case over red light cameras in his home town of Mukilteo, now has a statewide ballot proposition that would effectively nullify the Washington Supreme Court's adverse ruling. The cameras were taken down in Mukilteo after 71 percent of voters agreed with that the automated ticketing machines had to go, but activists in other cities have been denied access to the ballot in the wake of the decision -- even though the state constitution says "the right of petition… shall never be abridged."
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?