[Fat Charlie]

The cop isn't against aeromods.

On the other hand, roadworthiness inspections have some validity. The OP's car needs brakes, has a bulb out, doesn't have working DRLs, needs a windshield, has loose struts, badly aimed headlights and is leaking fluids. And it has aeromods. Sadly, higher mpg and lack of income don't outweigh the You need brakes, lights, shocks and a windshield. I work at a shop and I see it all the time. Nobody here likes it, but we don't have income based specs on things like tire tread depth; that would be ridiculous.

The aeromods aren't what are killing this car. The aeromods and missing lights caught the cop's eye, and he pulled WD40 over and said Sir, your car is way out of compliance and you need to get it fixed- but I'm not going to do anything about it today. A few weeks later the same cop saw the same car with the same visible problems... so he stopped him and cited him for the most minor and most easily fixed problem, the "cover" over the lights. That passes the problem to a garage, where a tech has to look it over and is going to say "I can't put my signature on a roadworthiness sticker on this car" and deadlines the vehicle. That's not a power mad cop, it's an honest wrench.

If you're going to attract cops' attention, make sure you're otherwise in compliance with local laws. It's easy to make a case that a clear light cover with an aero benefit is worth a pass if that's the only thing that's "wrong" with the car.