He didn't say "I wasn't sure about the legality, so I referred it to a judge", rather saying he cited her because she got argumentative.

ie., "Don't challenge me if you disagree, otherwise I'll treat you as though you've broken the law."

That's pretty crappy behaviour on the officer's behalf IMHO.

There is no reason to get argumentative with someone doing their job, let alone a traffic cop. All that while they are working on your incident they have to watch out for traffic, your actions, and ensuring you don't get so excited your a threat to yourself or them.

More than likely, being familiar with "our type"; techies, she came off as a pretentious twit and treated him with contempt for being an ignorant cop.

I get that you're trying to provide some nuance here, but let's not pretend that all police officers are honest and decent individuals just doing everything by the book. It goes both ways.

I wouldn't have minded this if I were pulled over for speeding and he noticed and added it to the ticket but to get pulled over for being poor, harassed and then written a ticket for the windshield crack...

Maybe that's an acceptable way for the police to pull anyone they feel like over, but there should be some sort of suspicion required. I know this is the everyday experience of a lot of people but I don't think it's acceptable for it to happen to them either.

I've been abused in a similar manner, versus given a warning and relevant "counselling" (how to not get pulled over) from an officer with a more mentoring style.

Of course, being legally required doesn't mean it is actually the practice.

Maybe not, but by the same token it's not OK for them to add to a ticket because their ego is challenged, and to do so raises all kinds of unfavorable stereotypes about law enforcement.

Regardless, it sounds like she was argumentative. That's fine, but accept the consequences. Like I said, he is free to cite her, and I don't necessarily blame him for doing so given what I've read.

What I'm saying is that I believe the cop was within his rights to issue a citation. If that is true, then he did nothing wrong. He has discretion. If you're going to argue with the person who has a choice in whether or not to punish you then you should expect to be on the losing end.

It's no different than getting pulled over for speeding. Assuming that you were in fact speeding, the officer is allowed to issue a citation, or not. It's up to him. If you're a jerk then you're going to get one. "Tyrrany"? C'mon.

Cops don't have "rights" to issue citations. They have power to issue citation as an aspect of their job, and an obligation to use that power within its legal bounds, which include, in the case of issuing citations, generally that there be probable cause to believe that the person has violated the law identified on the citation.

Not if he didn't even try to discern whether it was being used for navigation. You ask whether the citation was unwarranted, but I think that betrays an authoritarian attitude. Was the citation warranted? The judge says no.

In this case I think it would've been most reasonable for the officer to ignore the fact that she was wearing Google Glass, and then check whether they should issue tickets for that in the future.

It's not difficult to infer that the officer initially intended to issue a warning to the woman about wearing Glass while driving, and that she argued the point saying it was not illegal. Her argument definitely would've signaled her intent to continue driving while wearing Glass, which the officer would have construed as a potential safety risk.

The officer really had no choice in the matter at that point, I'd say.