This Was So Absurd That I Looked Up the Law

California has passed a law that has different fines for speeding depending on your income level. 4/4/25 FrontPage says it is racial in purpose.  Why? Are rich people more of a hazard than poor people? The text of the law tells you why income is the defining rule for different fines:

(d) However, traditional enforcement methods have had a well-documented disparate impact on communities of color, and implicit or explicit racial bias in police traffic stops puts drivers of color at risk.

Yes, because they cannot say, "Blacks and Hispanics should have lesser fines than white people," they are using income as a proxy for race.  If 1948 Alabama had assessed higher fines on sharecroppers for late library book returns, there was no way this would have been tolerated by the federal courts.  

There are days that I think occupation and military government is the only solution to the ferocious racism of California government.

If speeding is a safety hazard, California is going to increase traffic accident death rates for blacks and Hispanics, as well as the people who are their neighbors-- who are disproportionately black and Hispanic.

This is astonishingly close to the Alabama Constitution (1901) provision that disqualified voters based on convictions for "moral turpitude" which disproportionately disqualified blacks.  One difference: the Alabama Constitutional Convention had the good sense not to say why.  It did not survive Hunter v. Underwood (1985).