A Broward County judge has ruled that Florida’s red-light camera statute violates due process protections, dismissing a ticket and delivering a blow to a program that has collected more than $1.2 billion in fines since 2010. Judge Steven P. DeLuca issued a 21-page ruling on March 3, 2026, finding Florida Statute 316.0083 unconstitutional under both the U.S. and Florida constitutions, according to Boing Boing.
The case, State of Florida v. Kayla Erin McFadden, stemmed from a camera-generated citation issued in the city of Sunrise. According to MotorBiscuit, the violation involved a vehicle owned by McFadden traveling through the intersection of North University Drive and NW 25th Court. A typical red-light camera fine in Florida is $158.
At the heart of Judge DeLuca’s ruling is a fundamental question about who bears the burden of proof. Under Florida Statute 316.0083, when a camera captures a red-light violation, the registered vehicle owner is presumed responsible unless they submit an affidavit identifying another driver. DeLuca found that this framework unconstitutionally shifts the burden of proof from the state to the accused vehicle owner, as CBS12 News reported.
The judge classified red-light camera traffic infractions as quasi-criminal proceedings, meaning the state must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That standard, DeLuca wrote, is incompatible with a system that assumes the car’s owner was behind the wheel simply because a camera photographed their license plate. He ruled the statute violates due process protections under both the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 9 of the Florida Constitution.
Joel Mumford, an attorney with The Ticket Clinic who was involved in the case, said the ruling affirms a basic legal principle. “The agencies issuing the tickets bear the burden to prove all elements of the offense, including who was driving the car,” Mumford stated. The advocacy group Stop the Cams Florida called the ruling a major victory.
In his order, Judge DeLuca also raised concerns about the fairness of the administrative process drivers face when contesting tickets. He noted that the initial hearing is conducted before a hearing officer who is an employee of the city, hired and paid by the city, and subject to firing by the city. DeLuca also cited similar Supreme Court rulings from Missouri and Minnesota that struck down automated traffic cameras for constitutional violations.
However, the ruling applies only to the specific case in Broward County and does not directly affect the broader statewide red-light camera program. Florida’s red-light camera law, known as the Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act, was passed in 2010, authorizing the use of red-light cameras statewide, as Web And IT News noted. The program survived a 2018 Florida Supreme Court challenge in the case Jimenez v. State.
Still, the ripple effects could be significant. Across the state, municipalities rely heavily on the cameras as both a safety tool and a revenue source. Fifteen red-light camera systems are operating at seven intersections in Boynton Beach alone. Meanwhile, the City of Pensacola has 13 red-light cameras installed at intersections, and according to city data from August, each location averaged nearly 100 citations a day, WEAR TV reported.
Pensacola reported more than 29,000 red-light camera violations in 2025. Mayor D.C. Reeves said the city would adjust if red-light cameras can no longer be used in Florida, signaling that local officials are already bracing for potential changes to the enforcement landscape.
The ruling now sets the stage for what could become a broader legal battle. Defense attorneys across Florida are expected to cite DeLuca’s reasoning in challenging pending red-light camera cases, according to Autoblog. Whether the state appeals the decision or the Florida Legislature moves to amend the statute remains to be seen.
For now, the cameras remain active throughout the state, and drivers who receive citations are still expected to respond. But Judge DeLuca’s ruling has injected fresh uncertainty into a program that has operated for more than 15 years despite facing numerous legal challenges — and given new ammunition to those who have long argued the cameras prioritize revenue over constitutional rights.
