This case applies only to the City of Springfield and more importantly the case was never about intersection safety camera programs or their constitutionality. This case is about a municipal administrative process that is unique in Missouri to the City of Springfield. No other Missouri city with an intersection safety camera program uses the Springfield administrative process or Springfield's camera company. Other Missouri cities use the type of judicial process which was validated by today's decision.Related Content:
This ruling is only about whether a city government may establish administrative procedures to handle various municipal violations rather than a judicial process, as state law requires. The Missouri Supreme Court was not presented with a challenge to the constitutionality of using intersection safety cameras. And to date, every court in the country, both federal and state, has upheld the validity of intersection safety camera programs when confronted with the merits of their constitutionality.
A federal court decision in St. Louis last year upheld the constitutionality of intersection safety cameras. And as Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook of the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote last year in a decision validating the constitutionality of Chicago 's safety camera program: "No one has a fundamental right to run a red light." (Idris v. City of Chicago , U.S. 7th Cir., No. 08-1363, decided Jan. 5, 2009).
Intersection safety camera programs have been proven to improve traffic safety by reducing red-light running which causes crashes, injuries and deaths.