Posted on 08/20/2016 7:01:19 PM PDT by Enlightened1
Holding defendants in jail because they can't afford to make bail is unconstitutional, the Justice Department said in a court filing late Thursday — the first time the government has taken such a position before a federal appeals court.
It's the latest step by the Obama administration in encouraging state courts to move away from imposing fixed cash bail amounts and jailing those who can't pay.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
That’s what bail bondsmen are for.
Many states do not have bail bondsmen.
8th amendment is clear...’Excessive bail shall not be required’. If you can’t afford bail, then it’s too high.
It’s called “Court is now optional, and so is obeying the law”.
There is law firm here in the St. Louis Metro suing municipalities for jailing people. The law firm says it was because they were poor. The municipalities say its because they refuse to come to court to plea their case or work out some type of payment plan. We are talking years of failures to appears and tens of thousands of cases.
Now its nationwide? Oh boy...
Oh.
Well, if someone has a bail of say 10 grand, can’t they put up 10%? Since I have never been arrested, I don’t know how it works very well.
But if anyone has to post bail, exceptions for income “disparity” should not enter the equation.
So what about people who have committed absolutely vicious crimes and their bail is extremely high so they won’t go out on the street and commit more crimes? They should have low bail so they can be free to commit more crimes?
Maybe they can work their way out. Wash dishes, or do laundry.
Nah....lets just have a free for all for so that they can take what they want. There hasn’t been enough FreeStuff handed out, yet.
Geez.
Your word should do just fine. The entire point is to show up for trail.
As for the 'crimes' it should be up to the judge or not to set bail. Just like it has always been, going back to our founding.
Its on.
No mercy.
That sounds reasonable.
But if there is bail, it should absolutely not depend on the finances of the arrestee. And of course there is so much else about the justice system that is infinitely worse than the bail/no bail situation.
OK, no Bail for anyone. Will “Just Us” be happy with that?
Why not? It should all be factored in. Excessive bail is excessive bail. If it will financially ruin you to post bail, simply to appear in court, that is crazy.
Again, bail should not be a form of bribery to the government or some revenue scheme.
I totally disagree. If there is bail at all, it should be commensurate with flight risk and severity of crime.
Should drivers license fees, property taxes or anything else be one sliding scales?
Insane.
Revolt must occur soon or insanity will overwhelm the sane.
BLM crowd has money. They can pay.
As for the sliding fees, I think lower income people already take it on the chin for those other fees. Especially with the current economy. Poorer people probably don't have property taxes[probably pay it via rent], drivers license, etc.
No, I don't think it is should be on a sliding scale. Do ya think 'rich' people should be to pay thousands and thousands in speeding tickets?
Is this satire?
It's the "Kate Steinle" ruling... killers can walk when caught if they say they're broke?
The Department of Justice has morphed into the "Criminal Protection Agency...
I am praying that the electorate wakes up.
That’s a phenominal number. good thing the MSMorons are all over it
The fee to the bail bondsman is 10%. If you have the assets (house, stocks, etc.) to back the loan, then the bail bondsman will cover the bail amount for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.