I read a different article about this subject a few months ago. I think it was Vice News (citation noted).
"Järlström told The Institute, “This case has always been about more than just me, and I’m thrilled that the court has put a stop to some of the engineering board’s worst abuses. Being an engineer is a big part of my identity, as it is for many people. Thousands of Oregonians are engineers—even though we have no reason to be licensed as professional engineers—and we are now free to use the word engineer to describe ourselves.”"
We (engineering school graduates) have always had the ability to identify as an engineer. My first job title was "Field Engineer", half the members of EB were probably a "Staff Engineer". When you represent yourself in a traffic court argument as an engineer you are implying implicit knowledge. He has no more knowledge about traffic patterns and light timing than any other person out there. If I remember correctly his wife or friend got busted by a red light camera. He came in as an "expert witness" and represented himself as an engineer. That's BS in my opinion.
I will say, Oregon backed down; maybe there is other info out there, I'm misinformed or they just didn't want to argue anymore.