License Plate Covers that Beat the Cameras Explained
A popular accessory among certain drivers is the anti-camera license plate cover that fits over your license plate. These covers are made of a special material that prevents an automatic license plate reader (ALPR) or other camera from being able to capture a readable image of your license plate. Your license plate may become so distorted that it cannot be identified manually either.
While these coverings may seem harmless, streetsandtravels.com describes them as having a dual function: "the first is to obscure license plate numbers from automatic license plate recognition systems ("ALPRS") while the second is to completely obscure the license plate number from any and all eyes when the arm over the plate is used." ALPRs provide an automated means for police to scan all the license plates on every car it passes , and match that against the database of vehicles with outstanding arrest warrants, stolen vehicles, and the like to find out if any of the vehicles failing within its path are worthy of getting stopped, you guessed it, for any number of reasons.
These covers are illegal to use in many jurisdictions and almost always are illegal to use if they prevent the other person in the other vehicle from reading your license plate and/or prevent law enforcement from being able to identify your vehicle’s license plate.
Legal Conditions in Your State
Beyond federal regulations, there is a patchwork of state laws and interpretations surrounding the legality of anti-camera license plate covers. As of today, only a handful of states specifically have laws that expressly prohibit or limit the use of anti-camera license plate covers. Many states either do not have laws explicitly addressing the use of these products, or have incorporated the definitions and applications of regulations through their motor vehicle regulatory agencies.
In Illinois, for example, the anchor of all motor vehicle regulations for the state is the Motor Vehicle Code. The Illinois Secretary of State’s Digital Signature and Electronic Dealership Services Unit provides guidance in the state regarding general rules and regulations. The Illinois Department of Transportation offers guidance to the public about specific license plate issues. Under the Illinois Vehicle Code, "it shall be unlawful to sell, offer for sale or use any license plate cover that impedes or obstructs the visibility of the letters, numbers or designs on the license plate." Illinois has not adopted any regulations regarding license plate covers. Rather, it is up to each local municipality to interpret the purpose of the law requiring unobstructed visibility of license plates on vehicles. A brief survey of Illinois municipalities revealed that the majority stated that they only restrict license plate covers based on the issue of visibility. The officers in these locales stated that the mere presence of a license plate cover was likely not sufficient to constitute probable cause for a traffic stop. However, caution should be used if one possesses a cover that obscures the number or identifying marks on a license plate. Some municipalities make themselves clear regarding the availability and possession of anti-camera plate covers. In Homer Glen, Illinois an officer stated that while these covers are permissible, the police department believes "that you’re really just throwing your money away on these products." Similarly, in Burr Ridge, Illinois, an officer stated that, while the presence of a license plate cover warrants reasonable suspicion for a traffic stop, officers "know that these things don’t work anyway, so we usually don’t bother about them."
Some states don’t address license plate covers specifically under their motor vehicle code, but consider them paralleling other laws prohibiting the modification of a motor vehicle’s registration plate. In New Jersey, for example, the state’s general Pop-Top Action Code allows New Jersey to issue tickets to vehicles for having an expired license plate sticker. Further, the code provides that, "No person shall drive a motor vehicle bearing a plate or plate bracket which contains any material that changes, alters or obscures the lettering upon the plate or sticker." Similar to Illinois, a ticket can be issued to a vehicle with an anti-camera license plate cover, or a standard frame that obscures the visibility of the digits on the registration sticker affixed to the plate. In 2007, after the above provision was enacted, the Head of the New Jersey Division of Motor Vehicles testified in the Senate that the Division officers would enforce the law by inspecting the license plate for visible numbers and letters from a distance, from the side, and from behind a vehicle, and would issue tickets for plates that were unreadable.
One of the simplest methods to determine if a state regulates license plate covers would be to check the database or online portal for each respective state’s Department of Motor Vehicles.
Penalties for Using Illegal Covers
In states where these covers are illegal, drivers who use them can be cited for a traffic infraction. For example, in California, driving with one of these covers is a violation of California Vehicle Code Section 5201. However, the fine is only $25 upon the first infraction. Of course, if you get a second one, the fines will go up.
Drivers should be aware that some states have made it illegal to obscure or cover a license plate with "any material", including the plastic factory cover, and may apply a penalty even to the manufacturers whose covers obscure the plate. For example, in Texas, if your license plate is covered, either by one of these plastic covers or the dealer-installed plastic cover, you can be fined $200. In Missouri, the fine for using an unsecured or obscured license plate is $500 for the first offense, and $1,000 to $2,000 for the second and subsequent offenses.
In some states, like Alabama, the manufacturer of the cover may be charged. Alabama state law provides that "if a person is convicted of possessing or utilizing an accessory to a motor vehicle designed and/or manufactured to defeat the purpose of automated traffic enforcement cameras as defined in section 32-5A-195.1, the person must be fined two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) and shall be required to appear before the district court within 30 days of notice of the warrant. Failure to appear before a district court upon issuance of a warrant shall result in an automatic probation revocation hearing. Failure to pay fines and costs within 30 days upon conviction shall result in an automatic failure to appear hearing in the district court regardless of whether the defendant is a juvenile."
Why They’re Not Legal
The reasons for legal restrictions on anti-camera license plate covers are driven by the desire to enhance public safety and to maintain the integrity of law enforcement processes. Law enforcement agencies argue that tools bought by the public, such as license plate scanners, anti-laser lights, and radar jammers, are not meant to be tampered with or altered as they essentially serve as a technological barrier between road-users and law enforcement personnel, mainly highway patrol.
Many law enforcement professionals and safety advocates argue that merely preventing the issuance of a fine does not constitute a reason good enough to prevent police enforcement of traffic and parking ordinances . If anything, they emphasize that such instances generally provide a negative nudge, in the form of ignoring traffic rules or instilling the idea that one is above the road rules. The law should be the law, they argue.
Another argument is that such products can not be used for illegal evasion and are therefore destructive for the greater good. The thought process behind this is that a license plate cover that can block automatic license plate readers is in itself a road rule-killer, and its top-advocates and analysts should stop denying it. This is particularly true if you consider that the majority of APLR (automatic license plate readers) are used by law enforcement agencies.
Alternatives to License Plate Covers that Beat the Cameras
While license plate covers or sprays with the claimed ability to evade red light cameras or speed traps continue to be sold online and in stores, the manufacturers’ claims are unfounded as such products don’t meet standards set by any national or state testing laboratory, according to the Center for Automotive Safety (CAS)-certified laboratory. Nearly all state laws require that license plates be readable by law enforcement, and products that don’t meet this standard may violate state law.
Where a red light camera or speed trap is legal, the only legitimate alternatives to the license plate covers are to obey the traffic laws or use other lawful means approved by the state to protect the information on your license plate or identify the owner of a car.
Opinions that Matter
Public attitudes on anti-camera license plate covers vary widely, as an anti-camera license plate cover can be viewed as a harmless attempt to avoid automated tickets or as an invitation to criminal activity. Reflective of these varying opinions, in response to complaints from the public about motorists evading red light and speed cameras with license plate covers, municipalities across the country enacted laws and ordinances banning the use of certain license plate covers.
In California, for example, certain municipalities have banned the use of anti-camera license plate covers based on the belief that anti-camera license plate covers encourage red light runners and create a public safety hazard, fearing that the mandate to stop at red lights will be more frequently ignored. In 2010, the City of Los Angeles passed an ordinance prohibiting the use of "plate blockers" on any vehicle, which encompasses any device or substance, except for naturally occurring substances like mud, that affects the ability to read the license plate number.
Pursuant to the Los Angeles Ordinance, covered materials include plastic, rubber, cardboard, tape, and other materials that obscure the plate number or render it illegible, including reflective covers, as well as plastic covers that obscure the full name of the state and/or county name. The Los Angeles Ordinance imposes a fine of $25 for each violation. A similar prohibition was enacted by the City of San Diego in 2008. Further, within California, the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and the California Highway Patrol (CHP) have warned against the use of plate blockers and red light filters, as they may violate California Vehicle Code Section 5201 requiring that all motor vehicles be equipped with a license plate clearly visible and unobstructed by other material.
Outside of California, many states have explicitly prohibited only the use of reflective license plate covers, such as Louisiana, Montana, New Jersey, Washington, as a reflective cover would materially impair the enforcement of traffic laws with the use of automated ticketing systems. Louisiana amended its license plate laws in 2005 to mandate that the license plate must be clearly legible and visible from 60 feet, which prohibits the use of "any material which reflects, projects or refracts light, causing the letters and/or numbers , or either thereof not to be clearly legible, visible and identifiable from a distance of 60 feet."
Washington, while not explicitly prohibiting the use of reflective license plate covers, mandates that license plates be free from any object or material that may interfere with the plate’s readability. Several states make it unlawful to use license plate covers at all. For example, Illinois makes it unlawful to use license plate covers that conceal or otherwise obstruct the letters and/or numbers on any license plate. Further, several states explicitly authorize the use of tinted license plate covers, provided that the tint does not obscure the plate number, under limitations such as keeping the reflection at or below a specified percentage. In Missouri, for example, the state authorizes the use of tinted license plate covers to the extent that the tint does not exceed the state’s allowable level of reflection for tinted windows, which is 20 percent on the front windshield.
On the federal level, several anti-camera license plate cover manufacturers have tried to sue law enforcement agencies for banning the use of these products. In 2000, an anti-camera license plate cover manufacturer sued the City of Kalamazoo, Michigan, when Kalamazoo found the anti-camera license plate covers to be illegal and ordered the manufacturer of the covers to issue recalls. The manufacturer sought a restraining order against the City citing violations of their First Amendment commercial speech rights, which the Court denied, ruling that "the right to not have a reflective plate cover in Kalamazoo does not implicate any First Amendment issues with Plaintiff."
Litigants have also sought to argue that the bans on anti-camera license plate covers violate the United States Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. As the claimed justification for prohibiting plate blockers is to increase public safety, litigants have argued that the bans are irrational because it has not been established that anti-camera license plate covers adversely affect public safety. In arguing that prohibiting anti-camera license plate covers is unjustified, litigants have pointed to the fact that these same law enforcement agencies permit tinted car windows and bicycle licenses, which the litigants claim are similarly obscured and more so than anti-camera license plate covers.