Danos Kallas v. Theresa L. Egan, Executive Deputy Commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles of the State of New York

“Whether the civil enforcement system should be modified nation-wide to integrate an educational option (with limitations for repeat offenders and retention of checks on citizen abuse) that would substantially dampen the effects of discrimination and arbitrary taxation, educate the public, and improve police-community relations and the public's perception of the police, and information sharing, in order to comport with Equal Protection and Due Process and the compelling, common sense, interest in information sharing between the public and the police...” Kallas v. Fiala, 591 Fed. Appx. 30 (2d Cir. 2015), No. 14-310, 2015 WL 399127 (2d Cir. Jan. 30,

SUMMARY ORDER, reh’g denied, No. 13 Civ. 8816 (GBD) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 13, 2014), cert, denied, pet. for cert, at (i).

Whether “...the statutes are also Unconstitutional under Equal Protection and Due Process because they do not integrate an objective progressive (sliding scale) fine schedule, thereby having the effect of disproportionately burdening minorities (who are proven, as a populace, to be less able to pay fines) and suppressing their upward mobility despite same being purportedly a key component of the American way of life. Thus, another problem with the "broken windows" view, other than that it also incorrectly presumes (at least until recently?) that enforcement is even-handed at this threshold, is not in its principle or that it apparently has the effect of lowering over-all crime but in its effect on minorities who are paying an unfairly disproportionate share of the cost and remaining (i)