Believe it or not that has been happening since the 50s. My aunt's father got a brand new Corvette and was blasting between toll booths in Florida. Then he arrived at the final stop and was issued a fat ticket because the times were much too short. They just did a little math and he got a big ticket. Now with technology it's all that much easier.
As Dave posted above, that's just now starting to sneak into Kaliforniastan in a few test cities. There are/should be legal challenges, the least trivial the driver must be identifiable- so that picture best reveal their face clearly. What fuzzies the landscape is if those tickets will be Infractions (has Judicial Review) or a Civil matter (no Judicial Review but maybe a retired police officer, CHP or "Kathy"- a buddy of the vendor).
Wow. That is why I wear my Groucho Marx disguise…
I've not seen or heard of that. (BTW, a ticket wouldn't do it, would need to be a conviction). There are some judges who have a rep for >100mph defendants getting a 30-day suspension (but that's those judges, not a law).
My understanding from reading several articles is that they are just jump starting the process by assigning a court administrator or a small panel to immediately review cases to assure public safety rather than wait for the court date when another violation could result in severe injury or death of an uninvolved driver. This makes sense when you think about what kind of person is weaving in and out of traffic at triple digits in a vehicle while sober. If the person is intoxicated it's pretty much game over and they're off the road although not always. But it is the completely heedless drivers that are taking advantage of low levels of enforcement that have been shown by data analysis to present a grave threat to the public. currently this is at courts discretion, but if these committees they convene give some flexibility to enforcement and drastically increase public safety, that's a good thing. I'm sure we will hear phrases from defense lawyers like kangaroo court in violation of due process rights, but that doesn't seem like a very good argument as long as the process is the same one. This would just speed it up and hey we all have a right to a speedy trial right?
