These 15 States Don't Have Red Light Cameras, Here's WhyJalopnikMichael FrankTue, September 22, 2026 at 2:25 AM UTCAdd us on GoogleAguus/Getty ImagesRed light cameras are terrible! Before we show evidence of why this might be true (or false), you need to know that states that are con don't always use the word camera in their legalese, nor do they all have outright bans on the use of cameras or other readers for, say, toll collection or speeding. As for why there are red light cameras, way back in the 1990s and early 2000s, before we had the staggering number of Flock cameras dotting the U.S. highways, states like California found remote enforcement helped significantly cut down on accidents.A 2002 audit by California found a 33% decrease in broadside collisions in Sacramento between 1998 and 2001, and a 16% fall in red light accidents in San Francisco between 1992 and 1997. But there was another issue highlighted in San Diego — a 37% uptick in rear-end crashes between 1995 and 2001, likely caused by drivers stopping short, trying to avoid getting an automated ticket. San Diego studied this and, noting wanting to ensure public trust, the city recommended longer yellow lights to allow drivers to get through intersections rather than risk speeding through the yellow or standing on their brakes.California still uses red light cameras, and, according to data from the Governor's Highway Safety Association (GHSA), so do 21 other states, along with Washington, D.C. But a minority of states have restricted their use or rescinded allowing them. Why? Concerns about yellow lights being too short for safety, concerns about due process, and not to mention the idea that remote ticketing is just another means of taxing citizens and raising revenue all plague electronic intersection monitoring. That's led some 15 states to restrict all or at least most forms of remote road traffic monitoring and ticketing.AdvertisementAdvertisementRead more: How Are Car Owners' Rights Protected By The 4th Amendment?How red light camera restrictions vary between these statesTrevor Srednick/Getty ImagesTrawling through the laws banning or restricting red light camera use provides some understanding of states' logic. For example, in Arkansas municipalities can operate cameras in locations like school zones and railroad crossings, but only with a police officer present. Meanwhile, Idaho bans red light cameras, and the state can only use automated license plate readers to investigate crimes, missing persons, or piece together the cause of traffic accidents. Maine bans using cameras to enforce town traffic but allows such systems to be used by the Maine Turnpike Authority. And in 2009, Mississippi forced the removal of extant traffic enforcement cameras at intersections.In light of current events (i.e., Flock cameras leading to the incorrect detainment of an automotive journalist, for instance), Missouri's situation is pretty interesting. The Show Me State had red light cameras, but in 2015 the Missouri Supreme Court ruled they were unconstitutional because they forced vehicle owners to prove they weren't the ones driving the car. On the other hand, St. Louis wants red light cameras again, but given the state court's ruling, somehow the city has to prove the driver of the car is actually behind the wheel at the time of the infraction.As for other states, Montana flat bans the use of the tech for traffic enforcement. Ohio law explicitly says that traffic cameras can only be used if they are monitored by live human cops, while Nevada bans them completely. New Hampshire mostly doesn't allow what it calls surveillance for traffic enforcement and ticketing, but does permit remote tech monitoring for certain sections of interstate — and to monitor traffic on some wooden bridges, naturally.Red light camera corruptionYoungvet/Getty ImagesTo finish our list of states that don't have red light cameras, New Jersey, New Mexico, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, and West Virginia all have restrictions on red light camera use. And their reasons are — maybe — reasonable. For instance, Texas passed a ban in 2019 on the grounds that the tech violates due process laws. But according to reporting in the Texas Tribune, the lawmakers who lost that fight noted that, not only did the camera systems fund state trauma centers to the tune of $18.3 million in 2017 specifically, but they were also effective at reducing accidents.AdvertisementAdvertisementAnd there is good cause to want to cut down accidents at intersections. Governors Highway Safety Association research found that in 2021, crashes involving red-light running killed 1,109 people, and there were 127,000 people injured in red-light-running crashes. Reducing these deaths and injuries, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, is possible using red light cameras. The non-profit says in cities that use red light cameras they've cut the red-light-running crash rate by 21% and fatal crashes at signalized intersections by 14%.Still, as with Flock, the tech seems continually mired in controversy. One installer, a company called Redflex, was caught lavishing gifts on local officials in exchange for installing cameras. That led to federal convictions in Chicago and Columbus, Ohio. New Jersey also had Redflex cameras — and in 2012 had its own issues with allegedly too-quick yellow lights designed specifically to ratchet up ticketing. Later it was revealed that 17,000 camera tickets were never issued due to a computer glitch. New Jersey wanted no part of this mess and ended the program in 2014. Never think that means the tech is dead, however, since even as Flock cameras are coming down, they're just being replaced by similar technology.Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox, and follow us or add us as a preferred search source on Google.Read the original article on Jalopnik.