{
  "id": "R45533",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R45533",
  "active": true,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 592320,
      "date": "2019-02-26",
      "retrieved": "2019-12-20T19:55:20.022287",
      "title": "U.S. Constitutional Limits on State Money-Bail Practices for Criminal Defendants",
      "summary": "Money-bail systems allow criminal defendants to avoid prison while awaiting trial by posting a bond set by a fee schedule. The impact of money-bail systems on indigent criminal defendants, however, has prompted legislative interest in and legal challenges to such systems, particularly when the bail does not reflect an individual\u2019s specific circumstances, such as potential flight risk or public safety. Critics of money-bail systems assert that fee schedules unduly burden indigent defendants, while supporters argue that fee schedules provide uniformity and ensure that defendants appear at trial. \nSeveral states and municipalities have reformed their bail systems. Voters in New Mexico approved a constitutional amendment that allows judges to deny bail to defendants considered exceptionally dangerous, but otherwise permits pretrial release of nondangerous indigent offenders who cannot make bail. Other jurisdictions have altered or eliminated their money-bail systems in recent years, including cities in Alabama, Georgia, and Maryland.\nCourts have heard legal challenges regarding whether state or local money-bail systems comport with the Constitution\u2019s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. The Supreme Court has established that the Constitution provides certain protections to indigents during sentencing and postconviction, including ensuring that an indigent\u2019s failure to pay a fine cannot result in an automatic revocation of probation or imprisonment beyond the statutory maximum term. The Court, however, has not addressed these rights in the bail context. Applying the rational basis standard, some courts have found money-bail systems that reasonably ensure a defendant\u2019s subsequent court appearance to be constitutional. Other courts have indicated that bail systems that detain indigent criminal defendants pretrial, without considering their ability to pay, may be unconstitutional.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": true,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45533",
          "sha1": "32d97cca18a0f701c15daf149f5b9d6272b62aae",
          "filename": "files/20190226_R45533_32d97cca18a0f701c15daf149f5b9d6272b62aae.html",
          "images": {}
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45533",
          "sha1": "4c89aa904dab7e75e7f25576cbfff1d6e260fe6c",
          "filename": "files/20190226_R45533_4c89aa904dab7e75e7f25576cbfff1d6e260fe6c.pdf",
          "images": {}
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 4850,
          "name": "Criminal Justice"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Constitutional Questions"
  ]
}