Elected Officials Request for Immediate Oversight and Remedy — Misuse of Commercial Statutes Against a Private Woman, Unlawful Towing, ADA Hardship, and Due Process Violations

Elected Officials Request for Immediate Oversight and Remedy — Misuse of Commercial Statutes Against a Private Woman, Unlawful Towing, ADA Hardship, and Due Process Violations 

Naomi Johnson
One of the People of New Jersey
P0 B0X

August 28, 2025

Assemblywoman Alixon Collazos-Gill (D)
39 South Fullerton Avenue, Second Floor, Suite 3
Montclair, New Jersey 07042

Congresswoman LaMonica McIver (D), 10th Congressional District
60 Park Place, Suite 302
Newark, NJ 07102

Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill (D), 11th Congressional District
357 S. Livingston Avenue, Suite 201
Livingston, NJ 07039

Re: Request for Immediate Oversight and Remedy — Misuse of Commercial Statutes Against a Private Woman, Unlawful Towing, ADA Hardship, and Due Process Violations

Dear Elected Officials,

I write to you as one of the People of New Jersey, not a corporation, not a commercial driver, but a private woman. The Constitution of New Jersey and the United States was written to protect the rights of the People, and your oath of office requires you to intervene when those rights are trampled under color of law. I am write to you to place on record my grievances, constitutional violations, and the continuing misconduct by the Glen Ridge Police Department and the Glen Ridge Municipal Court.

On February 24, 2025, I was stopped by Sergeant Anthony D. Mazza of the Glen Ridge New Jersey Police Department and cited for failure to stop at a stop sign, and operating an “unregistered” vehicle. Immediately after, my car was seized and towed, costing me $575.69, an unbearable burden on my fixed income as a disabled woman. My groceries were in my personal conveyance for seven days while it was held in the impound. By the time I was able to retrieve my car, all of that food had spoiled and I was forced to throw away a massive amount of groceries. This created not only financial loss but also unnecessary hardship for me as a disabled woman who already struggles to meet basic needs. The ADA requires reasonable accommodations, yet instead of accommodation I was subjected to a humiliating and harmful situation,  first being forced to walk home in pain after the seizure, and then losing essential food because of the state’s unlawful actions.

This raises a critical question: On what lawful grounds can a private woman’s personal conveyance be seized under commercial statutes designed for carriers engaged in interstate commerce? 49 C.F.R. (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations) applies to commercial operators transporting goods or passengers for hire, not to private People traveling for personal purposes. The New Jersey Title 39 vehicle code is being misapplied in the same way, treating a private woman as if she were a commercial driver under contract with the state. No commercial nexus: Title 39 and 49 CFR apply to commerce, not to a private woman making a personal trip (cemetery visit). The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized the fundamental right to travel without undue government interference. In Thompson v. Smith, 154 S.E. 579 (Va. 1930), the court held: “The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon… is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Unlawful seizure and encroachment on the fundamental right to travel (Tull v. United States, 481 U.S. 412 (1987)). The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that government actors may not overreach their authority: “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime” (Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d 486, 489). Likewise, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), reaffirmed that procedural safeguards must be honored to prevent abuse of power. When a prosecutor or court lacks standing, evidence, or lawful jurisdiction, dismissal is required.

Yet I was treated as though my private travel was a commercial act. This is not only unlawful,  it is oppressive.

Further, the Glen Ridge Municipal Court compounded the violation by issuing a bench warrant for “failure to appear,” despite my citation explicitly stating that no court appearance was required. Even Judge Mark Clemente’s own correspondence acknowledges this fact. Nevertheless, a warrant was entered in my name, creating fear so severe that I now avoid leaving my home, terrified of being unlawfully arrested.

Municipal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and may not presume authority without evidence or standing. In my case, no verified complaint or sworn statement has ever been produced by the prosecution to substantiate their claims. This constitutes a fundamental violation of due process, as recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 U.S. 684 (1975), which establish that the burden of proof and the presumption of innocence are non-negotiable principles.

The Municipal Court functions as a quasi-criminal administrative tribunal, operating more as a commercial venue than a court of constitutional law. This system violates my unalienable rights by converting private affairs into matters of commerce against my will. Traffic courts are not Article III courts of record, yet they issue bench warrants and deprive residents of liberty without due process. This structure undermines the separation of powers and infringes upon my unalienable rights under both the New Jersey and United States Constitutions.

This conduct violates due process protections of the 14th Amendment, my ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) rights as a disabled woman who cannot safely walk long distances (yet was forced to walk home after the towing and then suffered food insecurity from the loss of my groceries), and my right to equal protection under the law. Which leads me to ask: Why is my race relevant to a moving violation unless the system is tracking, profiling, or targeting citizens of color? The disproportionate impact of these unlawful practices on communities of color cannot be ignored. “The officer who towed my vehicle has taken a sworn oath to uphold the Constitution. Instead, he acted in direct violation of that oath by seizing my property without lawful cause.”

I urge your office to investigate the Glen Ridge Police Department and Municipal Court for misuse of commercial statutes against private People. Address the unlawful towing and financial hardship imposed on me. Examine the ADA and due process violations, including the improper bench warrant. Take legislative or oversight action to ensure municipal courts do not operate as administrative collection agencies against the People of New Jersey. Provide assurance that the rights of the People of New Jersey, including myself, are protected from further abuse.

As a constituent and one of the People you serve, I respectfully demand immediate attention to this matter. I remind you that government exists only by the consent of the governed. Your sworn duty is to protect the rights of the people and to ensure that no court or agency operates outside the bounds of the Constitution. Silence and inaction will only embolden further abuses of power.

Enclosed are the judge’s letter and the Glen Ridge Internal Investigation report.

Respectfully submitted,

Naomi Johnson
One of the People of New Jersey
Private Woman / Beneficial Owner