Constitutional Questions Raised Regarding Greensboro’s Red Light Camera Program

Readers will recall that the city of Greensboro is poised to reinstate its notorious red light camera program.

The New American has an article that calls into question whether such programs are constitutional. Here are some relevant excerpts:

Outsourcing enforcement to private, for-profit companies undermines due process and removes accountability from law enforcement. Privacy concerns are mounting, as third-party operators often control surveillance equipment and personal data collected from motorists. While proponents claim these systems enhance public safety, research is mixed, and programs across the country have been dismantled due to public backlash and legal challenges. Growing resistance reflects deeper concerns about the privatization of policing and erosion of constitutional protections — especially when profit motives replace the rule of law...

Automated enforcement replaces law-enforcement officers with machines, presuming guilt and issuing citations without proper due process. Such systems violate the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, as these devices capture data without warrants or individualized suspicion. They also undermine the Fifth and 14th Amendments, which guarantee due process and equal protection under the law, by removing context and discretion from enforcement…

By continuously monitoring roadways and public spaces, automated enforcement expands the surveillance state, inverting the proper relationship between government and citizens. Rather than a limited government that serves and protects individual rights, citizens are treated as suspects by a faceless, automated bureaucracy.

Such systems mark a departure from constitutional governance. The proper role of government is to secure life, liberty, and property — not to monitor every street corner or regulate every aspect of behavior. Local issues such as speeding, distracted driving, or noise complaints are better addressed through education, local engagement, and voluntary community efforts — not top-down mandates from a bureaucratic enforcement apparatus. Upholding the Constitution requires rejecting surveillance-based enforcement that treats liberty as expendable in the name of security.