What grounds if any would be likely used to strike down Minneapolis' red cars on Lake Street ban?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Minneapolis has a very strange and archaic law that specifically prohibits red cars from being driven on Lake Street, one of the major routes in south Minneapolis. Needless to say this is not enforced and probably never has been within the lifetime of any poster here.

But if it ever was enforced for some bizarre reason and thus was challenged in court...what would be the reasoning if any to strike it down? After all there are plenty of laws restricting certain vehicles from certain roads, although those are based on size and weight requirements, and Minneapolis also restricts all vehicles except buses and taxis (but not rideshares) from a street in downtown. But those aren't as arbitrary as restricted based on the vehicle color. However is it really a First Amendment right to drive a red car on all public streets? I can see the argument but it sounds kind of weird.

Is there some other standard that would strike down this law?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

What was the reason for it in the first place?

What was the reason for it in the first place?

I'm wondering this as well.

I think it had something to do with illegal street racing. Street racers were commonly using red cars for visibility or something, so this supposedly made it easier to have cause to break up any.