In Amezcua v. City of Pomona (1985) 170 Cal. App. 3d 305, the City of Pomona enacted a substantially similar ordinance prohibiting non-motorized pushcarts. The plaintiffs were of Mexican ancestry, and sold Mexican ice cream products, including paletas, from non-motorized pushcarts. They argued that the ordinance denied their rights of equal protection, because it created two classes of peddlers: one using motor-driven vehicles and one using pushcarts, and this discrimination deprived them of their right to work without due process of law. They also argued that the ordinance was intended to discriminate against persons of Mexican ancestry whose products were traditionally sold from pushcarts. The City of Pomona countered that the ordinance was enacted for health and safety reasons, because non-motorized pushcarts were unrefrigerated, impeded traffic, and were hazardous to motorists. (Amezcua, supra, 170 Cal. App. 3d at pages 308-309.)