Justice Department says it’s unconstitutional!
It’s unconstitutional to keep poor defendants in jail before their trial simply because they can’t afford to pay bail. That’s according to an amicus brief filed in federal court by the Justice Department on Friday, Reuters reports. According to NBC News, the Justice Department found that the practice violates the 14th Amendment and that bail amounts that don’t take poverty into account “unlawfully discriminate based on indigence.” It says courts must find a better way to make sure impoverished defendants show up to court than keeping them in jail.
The brief was filed in the case of Maurice Walker. Walker, who is poor and has mental health issues, was arrested for being a pedestrian under the influence in Calhoun, Georgia, the Huffington Post reports. Court is only held once per week in Calhoun, and Walker was kept in jail for six days because he couldn’t afford to pay the $160 bail for his freedom. The city argued that it’s perfectly legal to set bail amounts based on the seriousness of crimes without any consideration for a defendant’s ability to pay it. A federal court ruled against Calhoun, but the city appealed.
Walker was probably happy to have 3 squares and bed out of the rain for a week. Idiot do-gooders. Why don’t they donate to a pool the poor can dip in for bail if they feel so strongly. Of course, then they couldn’t bill the taxpayers for these idiot lawyer make-work full employment lawsuits.
Another Obismal lurch towards total lawlessness.
Equal justice will be doled out according to your worth.
If that’s the case, release the Bundys and the Hammons.
Oh, what’s that you say? … they were never offered the option of posting bail?????
Well, then … fuck you federal tyrants and traitors. Your day of justice will come.
The moron imagined, “…courts must find a better way to make sure impoverished defendants show up to court than keeping them in jail.”
I’m all fucking ears.
When mom puts up her home to get sonny boy out, unless said sonny boy is a total scum, he shows up. That’s the whole point of bail. If there’s no repercussions to skipping, skipping will increase. Another example of REgressives thinking they can change human nature.
Wait… So I can quit my job, commit crimes and then blame it on being poor and not go to jail?
HA! Sounds great! Oh, wait though… Do you get pref treatment if you’re a BLM poster child?
Plus if you go to jail, Obama will let you out, if you’re not white and a career criminal.
The day Holder told judges, at a conference, that they could site against laws they felt were not just, was the day we should have seen the blood on the walls.
The devil Soros has his money backing chaos everywhere. Be alert.
Easy problem to solve. Don’t set bail if the perp can’t afford it. People are held without bail all the time.
Seriously though, where I live, bail is frequently set higher than would normally be expected because it means more revenue for the justice system, bail bondsmen, etc. Same thing for fines, which accrue surcharges and interest if not promptly paid. Many times people are forced to accept plea bargains simply because they are too poor to pony up the do-re-mi. Law enforcement’s definitely become a for-profit business, and it’s all about the money.
As I understand the process if you have bail set at @20,000 and you have to go to a Bail Bondsman for that his wee will be something like 10% of the value of the bond or $2,000. He gets this whether you’re guilty or not. It strikes me that the whole bail system could use a thorough review and some changes making it more relevant and less of a punishment. As @Vietvet says, “it’s all about the money”.