Case: 15-10732 Document: 00513494190 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/05/2016
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-10732 United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit
FILED JAMES H. WATSON, And Others Similarly Situated, May 5, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Plaintiff - Appellant Clerk
v.
CITY OF ALLEN, TEXAS; CITY OF AMARILLO TEXAS; CITY OF ARLINGTON, TEXAS; CITY OF AUSTIN TEXAS; CITY OF BALCH SPRINGS TEXAS; CITY OF BALCONES HEIGHTS, TEXAS; CITY OF BASTROP, TEXAS; CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS; CITY OF BEDFORD TEXAS; CITY OF BURLESON, TEXAS; CITY OF CEDAR HILL, TEXAS; CITY OF CLEVELAND, TEXAS; CITY OF CONROE, TEXAS; CITY OF COPPELL TEXAS; CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI TEXAS; CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS; CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS; CITY OF DIBOLL, TEXAS; CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, TEXAS; CITY OF EL PASO TEXAS; CITY OF ELGIN, TEXAS; CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH, TEXAS; CITY OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS; CITY OF FRISCO TEXAS; CITY OF GARLAND TEXAS; CITY OF GRAND PRAIRIE TEXAS; CITY OF HALTOM CITY, TEXAS; CITY OF HUMBLE, TEXAS; CITY OF HURST, TEXAS; CITY OF HUTTO, TEXAS; CITY OF IRVING TEXAS; CITY OF JERSEY VILLAGE, TEXAS; CITY OF KILLEEN TEXAS; CITY OF LEAGUE CITY, TEXAS; CITY OF LITTLE ELM, TEXAS; CITY OF LONGVIEW, TEXAS; CITY OF LUFKIN, TEXAS; CITY OF MAGNOLIA, TEXAS; CITY OF MARSHALL TEXAS; CITY OF MESQUITE TEXAS; CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS; CITY OF PLANO TEXAS; CITY OF PORT LAVACA, TEXAS; CITY OF RICHARDSON, TEXAS; CITY OF RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS; CITY OF ROANOKE, TEXAS; CITY OF ROUND ROCK, TEXAS; CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; CITY OF SUGAR LAND TEXAS; CITY OF TOMBALL TEXAS; CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK TEXAS; CITY OF WATAUGA, TEXAS; CITY OF WILLIS, TEXAS; REDFLEX TRAFFIC SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED; AMERICAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED; AMERICAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS, L.L.C.; XEROX STATE & LOCAL SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED, formerly known as ACS State & Local Solutions, Incorporated; STATE OF TEXAS Case: 15-10732 Document: 00513494190 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/05/2016
No. 15-10732 Defendants - Appellees
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. REAVLEY, Circuit Judge: This putative class action challenges the use of red light cameras within Texas and, more specifically, the legislation authorizing such cameras. The case was originally filed in state court and subsequently removed to federal court. We must decide whether it should have been remanded. 1 BACKGROUND Chapter 707 of the Texas Transportation Code allows municipalities to install and operate "photographic traffic signal enforcement systems," i.e., red light cameras. Tex. Transp. Code Ann. §§ 707.001(3), 707.002. Municipalities that choose to take advantage of Chapter 707 may enact ordinances authorizing civil penalties against "the owner of a motor vehicle" that is photographed running a red light. Id. at § 707.002. The 53 municipal defendants in this case have done so. Private companies administer the municipalities' red light camera programs. See id. at § 707.003. Defendants American Traffic Solutions, L.L.C., American Traffic Solutions, Inc. (collectively, "ATS"), Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc. ("Redflex"), and Xerox State
1 The 58