Worshipping her own personal irresponsibility, Marla Leaf is challenging a $75 speeding ticket in the Iowa Supreme Court.
Leaf received a $75 ticket in February 2015, after being accused of driving through Cedar Rapids at 68-mph while in a 55-mph zone. Her contention is that because the city’s cameras are operated by a private company, her constitutional rights have been unjustly infringed by the fine. Conversely, the Cedar Rapids government claims that because a police officer, not a company, makes the final determination of speeding, Leaf’s fine is justified.
I’m with Cedar Rapids.
Look, I get that no one likes paying speeding fines: they carry a hint of Orwellian Big Brother-ism and impose a painful cost on a normally marginal excess of speed. Still, in both constitution and practice, the law is uncomplicated here: Government has a compelling state interest in restricting driving that exceeds safe limits.
It does not matter that we may believe some speed limits are too low, and personally, I do, it matters only that the government has the authority to set those limits and enforce their application. The government has this authority because the courts have determined that the consequences of speeding can, as the video below suggests, be catastrophic.
Yet there’s a particular stupidity to Leaf’s case. For one, in that she is accused of driving 13-mph over the limit, not 5-mph or even 10-mph, her excess suggests a contempt for the law.
But her challenge also represents judicial activism of the worst kind. If Leaf believes the speed limits are too low, she should petition Cedar Rapids city council to change them, or she should run for office herself. But Leaf shouldn’t waste taxpayer money in the courts to avoid culpability for own choices.
Some Americans might regard Leaf as a martyr for individual freedom — but in my opinion, she’s just tedious.
