Red Light Cameras Are a Bipartisan Threat to Freedom and Fairness

House Bill 275 sounds like a simple safety tweak—red light cameras at a few spots to catch runners.

But dig in, and it’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, expanding surveillance and fines in ways that rile up conservatives and progressives alike. As Criminal Justice Policy Analyst at Libertas Institute, with a decade of experience in criminal prosecution and local governance in Utah and Montana, I urge rejecting this bill outright. It’s not about safer roads; it’s government overreach that erodes freedoms, punishes hardworking families unfairly, and fails to deliver real results, no matter your politics.

Utahns cherish limited government and personal responsibility, yet this bill hands more power to the state, turning intersections into automated cash machines that undermine due process. Sure, proponents claim it could deter red-light runners at high-risk spots without adding cops on the beat, but evidence tells a different story. 

In states like Texas, where cameras were banned in 2019 after bipartisan outcry, cities pocketed millions in fines while overall crashes didn’t drop; right-angle wrecks fell, but rear-ends spiked 19%, per a major review. It’s not true law and order; it’s bureaucracy bloating, punishing everyday drivers for minor slips without a fair chance to defend themselves. 

Without verifying the identity of the driver, tickets hit vehicle owners regardless of who was behind the wheel, violating basic due process by assuming guilt without proof or context. Nationwide, these programs start as “pilots” but sprawl into constant monitoring, micromanaging free movement and prioritizing revenue over real reform, contradicting core principles of fiscal conservatism and individual liberty.

This is a bipartisan issue: progressives join conservatives in opposing this surveillance creep, seeing how it burdens low-income and minority communities with debt traps that conservatives also decry as unfair government intrusion. Chicago’s system tickets black and Latino drivers at twice the rate of white ones, per ProPublica, leading to lost licenses and jobs that hit working families hardest. In D.C., cameras cluster in predominantly black neighborhoods, despite similar crash rates citywide, fueling distrust that echoes conservative concerns about overpolicing. 

Nine states (from Maine to Mississippi) have banned them outright, proving this tech’s harm outweighs the hype across the political spectrum

Keeping people safe doesn’t mean giving up our privacy. There are better, less intrusive ways to deal with red-light violations. Extend yellow lights to give drivers a fairer margin, redesign intersections for natural safer flow, and invest in community education that empowers people to drive responsibly without preemptively punishing them. These approaches prevent problems at the source rather than catching them after the fact with cameras that assume guilt and expand state eyes everywhere.

Utahns and Americans, this bill divides us by design—reject HB 275 to protect liberty and fairness for all. True safety builds trust, not traps; let’s drive that home before it’s too late.

Author Profile Image
About the author

Josh Nemeth

Share Post:

Fighting for a Future Where Individuals Are Fully Liberated to Pursue Their Dreams, Free from Coercion and Control.

You Might Also Like

The first week of Utah’s 45-day legislative session is officially behind us, and lawmakers have been busy introducing bills, holding committee hearings, and setting the tone for the weeks ahead.
Public schools are supposedly neutral spaces. However, recent events show how wrong that idea can be.
Utah’s legislative session begins next Tuesday, and we wanted to offer a quick refresher—or introduction—on how this fast-paced 45-day process works.

Help us Nail and Scale Policies to Reduce Government Control

Your tax-deductible contributions to Libertas Institute increase freedom across the country.