Good Afternoon Class, Do Not Agree That Cash Bail Should Be

Good Afternoon Classi Do Not Agree That Cash Bail Should Be Eliminate

Good afternoon class, I do not agree that cash bail should be eliminated. Keeping cash bail as an option in pretrial procedures makes it more difficult for the defendants to get out of jail while waiting trial which would help keep the criminals off the streets. Eliminating cash bail could put a damper on the ability of judges to make informed decisions about these defendants. Ending cash bail and allowing defendants to leave jail without paying any money could have serious ramifications especially for those law-abiding citizens. Judges are often the ones who decide the amount of someone’s bail, and they typically have a broad discretion to raise or lower it.

Taking this authority away from a judge when he is the expert on the law and the severity of the alleged crime committed could directly affect the safety of the public. You could argue that cash bail negatively affects and discriminates against people of color and the poor. But why do the issues have to discriminate against a specific race or how much money a person has. Let’s get to the nitty gritty and discuss the actual crimes that are being committed and the consequences that come with committing those crimes to include cash bail. Cash bail is used as a guarantee that a defendant will return for trial or hearings.

The money is returned after the necessary court appearance is adhered too otherwise that money is forfeited to the government. “Understanding how the contours of wealth-based equal process developed is crucial to understanding how it has been applied in the cash bail context, how it ought to be applied, and how the Supreme Court will perceive future attempts to expand it. The current status of the doctrine is like a project cut short, more defined by political shifts than by a clear sense of its direction and purpose (Batkin, 2021).” It still boggles my mind that wealth-based equal process is one of the many tools that people are using to fight against cash bail. When you commit a crime, is anyone thinking of how much money the criminal has or where they come from, especially if that crime has directly affected you or your family.

I would say no, so why then do people care about the criminal's financial status when they have been arrested for committing a crime. I hope everyone is having a good week! Donna

Paper For Above instruction

Cash bail is a longstanding component of the criminal justice system, serving as a financial guarantee that accused individuals will appear in court for their trials and hearings. The debate surrounding cash bail involves balancing public safety, fairness, and the rights of the accused. Many argue that eliminating cash bail would compromise public safety, while proponents believe it perpetuates discrimination and inequality. This paper will explore the justification for maintaining cash bail, emphasizing its role in ensuring courtroom attendance and safeguarding community interests.

One primary justification for cash bail is its effectiveness in ensuring that defendants appear for their court dates. When a defendant posts bail, they have a financial incentive to return to face their charges, reducing the likelihood of flight. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, pretrial detention often correlates with increased risk of absconding, thereby justifying bail as a tool to mitigate this risk (USDOJ, 2016). Without the possibility of bail, many defendants, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, might evade prosecution, leading to delayed justice and potential danger to the community.

In addition to ensuring court appearances, cash bail serves as a mechanism for defendants to demonstrate their respect for the judicial process. Paying bail signifies acknowledgment of the legal process and a commitment to comply with court procedures. Removing this monetary aspect could diminish the perceived seriousness of court obligations, potentially eroding respect for the judicial system (Lurigio & Wexler, 2020). Moreover, bail allows courts to impose restrictions on defendants, such as house arrest or electronic monitoring, tailored to individual risk levels, thereby aiding in risk management and public safety.

Critics of cash bail often cite its disproportionate impact on the poor and minority populations. It is true that wealth-based disparities can lead to inequitable outcomes, where affluent defendants can afford to secure release, while poorer individuals remain incarcerated. However, simply abolishing cash bail does not address the underlying issues of systemic inequality. Alternatives such as risk assessment tools and supervised release programs can be implemented to ensure fairness without compromising public safety (Shapiro et al., 2018). The focus should be on designing equitable bail practices that do not disproportionately disadvantage the impoverished.

Furthermore, eliminating cash bail could lead to unintended consequences, such as increased pretrial detention of indigent defendants, which can hinder access to employment, housing, and family stability. The American Bar Association emphasizes that detention prior to trial should be reserved for high-risk individuals, and that the justice system must balance individual liberty with community safety (ABA, 2020). Cash bail, despite its flaws, provides a practical method for courts to manage this balance effectively while safeguarding public interests.

Significantly, the legal doctrine of wealth-based equal process—arguably a foundational principle—aims to prevent outcomes driven solely by economic status. However, its application in the context of cash bail is complex. As Batkin (2021) notes, the development of this doctrine has been influenced heavily by political shifts, and its implementation remains inconsistent. While it advocates for equal treatment regardless of wealth, in practice, it often results in unequal pretrial detention lengths due to economic disparities. This underscores the need for comprehensive reforms rather than outright elimination of bail practices, ensuring that justice remains fair and equitable without jeopardizing public safety.

In conclusion, cash bail plays a vital role in the criminal justice system by promoting court attendance, ensuring accountability, and protecting public safety. Though reforms are necessary to address disparities and improve fairness, eliminating cash bail altogether risks undermining safety and judicial authority. As the debate continues, policymakers should consider implementing evidence-based risk assessments and targeted bail reforms, preserving the system’s integrity while striving for equitable outcomes. Maintaining the capacity for judicial discretion and ensuring defendant accountability are essential components of a just and effective legal process.

References

• American Bar Association. (2020). Pretrial Justice Reform. Retrieved from https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/publications/model_professional_rules_of_conduct/pretrial_justice-reform/
• Batkin, L. (2021). Wealth-Based Equal Process and Cash Bail. New York University Law Review, 96(5), 1549–1581.
• Lurigio, A. J., & Wexler, H. (2020). Pretrial Release and Bail: Policies and Practices. Journal of Criminal Justice, 66, 101678.
• Shapiro, A., et al. (2018). Reducing Racial Disparities in Pretrial Detention. Criminology & Public Policy, 17(2), 245-272.
• U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ). (2016). Pretrial Justice and Its Effectiveness. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.