Contact: Charles Territo
Title: Senior Vice President Communications, Marketing and Public Affairs
Phone: (480) 443-7000


SCOTTSDALE, AZ– Despite a recent Hamilton County Common Pleas Court ruling, red-light and speed safety cameras in Ohio remain on strong legal ground.

Most notably in 2010 in Mendenhall v. City of Akron, 374 Fed.Appx 598, the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed the lower Court’s ruling that the City of Akron’s photo enforcement ordinance did not violate due process by imposing civil penalties for speeding violations irrespective of whether the owner was in fact driving the vehicle when the violation was recorded.

Additionally, in a similar ruling, the Ohio Supreme Court (Mendenhall v. Akron, 117 Ohio St.3d 33, 2008-Ohio-270) also upheld the City of Akron, OH speed safety camera ordinance under the City’s home rule authority.  In that ruling, the Supreme Court found that an “Ohio municipality does not exceed its home-rule authority when it creates an automated system for enforcement of traffic laws that imposes civil liability upon violators, provided that the municipality does not alter statewide traffic regulations.”

Furthermore, the court added, “Enactment of Akron’s ordinance is not an exercise of self- government but of concurrent police power. The statute governing speed limits is a general law because it is a comprehensive statewide enactment, setting forth police regulations that apply uniformly to all citizens throughout Ohio. Akron Ordinance 461-2005, which provides for implementation of an automated mobile speed-enforcement system, does not conflict with state law because it does not alter or supersede state law  The ordinance provides for a complementary system of civil enforcement that, rather than decriminalizing behavior, allows for the administrative citation of vehicle owners under specific circumstances. Akron has acted within its home rule authority granted by the Constitution of Ohio.”

Both of these rulings are consistent with other rulings in Ohio as well as throughout the country upholding the constitutionality of photo enforcement programs.

“Ohio law is abundantly clear as to whether or not a local municipality has the authority to implement a road safety camera program,” said American Traffic Solutions General Counsel George Hittner. “Both the state Supreme Court and Federal Appeals Courts have overwhelmingly ruled in their favor.  We expect that upon further review, the Appeals Court will follow the same precedent set by other Courts in Ohio and throughout the United States.”

About American Traffic Solutions:

ATS is proud to be the market leader in road safety camera installations in North America. ATS has more than 3,200 installed red-light and speed safety cameras serving more than 30 million people. ATS has contracts in nearly 300 communities in 21 states and Washington, D.C., including: Akron, East Cleveland, Fort Worth, Kansas City, Memphis, Nassau County (N.Y.), New York City, Orlando, Philadelphia, Seattle and St. Louis. ATS also offers PlatePass, an automated electronic toll payment service that enables rental vehicle customers to use high-speed, cashless electronic toll lanes. ATS is a privately-owned, U.S. corporation. For more information, please visit: or  To view video that serves as a chilling reminder of the dangers that red-light runners present to our family and children; visit ATS on YouTube here:


View the Ohio Supreme Court decision here: pdf-icon1

View the Mendenhall US 6th Circuit Decision here:  pdf-icon1