The fight over cashless bail: What you need to know
The issue of cashless bail is back on lawmakers’ minds this week as President Donald Trump’s allies in Congress work to advance legislation that would, in some cases, ban reform that releases low-risk defendants without payment of money before trial. The president and his supporters say the practice puts the public at risk from potentially dangerous individuals who could reoffend.
In late August, the president signed two executive orders: one directing federal agents in the District of Columbia to seek pretrial detention of offenders “to the fullest extent permissible,” and another threatening to deny federal funding to cities and states that have largely eliminated cash bail. The Justice Department has not yet released an advance list of locations it is targeting for the use of cashless bail.
Meanwhile, a bill introduced by Elise Stefanik, a Republican congresswoman from New York, that would ban cashless bail in Washington, D.C., was introduced by the House Rules Committee on November 17. District leaders urged Congress to reject the effort, calling it a federal overreach.
Why we wrote this
Cashless bail is intended to ensure that low-income people don’t have to stay in jail before trial unless a judge deems them dangerous. President Donald Trump says the system is dangerous and is pressuring cities and states to end it.
What is cashless bail?
Traditionally, bail is a sum of money paid by defendants to secure their release before trial. Since it is a refundable deposit, it serves as a type of insurance that defendants will return to court. Critics say the system punishes the poor: Richer defendants can more easily post bail, while lower-income people may have to stay in jail, sometimes for months.
Cashless bail reforms aim to address this problem by replacing financial bail with risk-based or individualized assessments. Judges decide whether a person should be detained or released based on factors such as public safety and flight risk, not on their ability to pay.
Why is the White House targeting him?
President Trump has seized on high-profile crimes committed by people released before trial — incidents amplified in conservative media to argue that there is a revolving door in the justice system.
In Charlotte, North Carolina, a man with a lengthy criminal record was released on a written promise to appear in court — a form of cashless bail — before fatally stabbing Iryna Zarutska, 23, a Ukrainian refugee, on a light rail train in August. The killing has become a rallying cry for opponents of bail reform, who say repeat offenders fall through the cracks and face little accountability.
Federal agents from the Department of Homeland Security arrived in Charlotte this week as part of a high-profile campaign against illegal immigration and crime. (The suspect in Ms. Zarutska’s murder is a U.S. citizen, not an illegal immigrant. But Republican lawmakers and federal officials are using the case to highlight concerns about Mecklenburg County’s crime and “sanctuary” policies.)
The president has also used cases like Ms. Zarutska’s to portray bail reform as “the fantasy of the radical left” that has transformed America’s streets into a “hunting ground for repeat offenders.” But researchers believe that these examples are aberrant: study after study shows that the overwhelming majority of defendants released without bail appear in court and do not reoffend while awaiting trial.
Can the president reverse the state’s bail reforms?
No. The federal government cannot override state criminal procedure. But Republican lawmakers are considering legislation to strengthen pretrial release rules in states like New York and Texas. North Carolina passed “Iryna’s Law” in September, which eliminates cashless bail for certain violent crimes and repeat offenders. Some rules reintroduce financial bail for certain offenses or give judges more latitude to determine whether a defendant could pose a danger to themselves or others.
While the White House could attempt to financially punish states and cities, legal experts say withholding federal funds or imposing fines because of the bail policy is likely to trigger lawsuits. In recent months, courts have struck down similar attempts by the Trump administration to overrule states on a variety of issues, including sanctuary city practices, education policies and immigration enforcement.
“There is certainly a risk of litigation,” says Sharlyn Grace, a deputy public defender in Cook County, Illinois. “The courts have stopped many of the president’s attempts to use untied funding to punish states and municipalities with policies he doesn’t like. »
What does the evidence say about the effectiveness of cashless bail?
Several states and jurisdictions have reduced the use of financial bail for low-income, low-risk defendants over the past decade, including Alaska, California, Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, and Washington, D.C., promoting alternatives such as supervised release.
But after the sharp rise in violent crime during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, many politicians, police chiefs and experts were quick to place the blame on bail reform.
In several studies, researchers have found no correlation between bail reform and higher crime rates.
In 2024, the Brennan Center for Justice conducted a study in 33 cities nationwide to assess the causal impact of bail reform on crime trends. The study found no statistically significant relationship between bail reform and crime rates.
Illinois became the first state to completely eliminate cash bail in September 2023. Over the following year, violent crime decreased by 12%, the jail population decreased by 14%, and court appearance rates remained high at 95% overall and 98% for violent crime cases.
In Chicago’s Cook County, homicides fell 16 percent and shootings fell 23 percent from pre-reform levels, while 84 percent of those released pretrial were not charged with any new offenses and 94 percent were not charged with new violent crimes.
Experts warn against drawing a straight line of cause and effect. Some studies focus directly on defendants released without bail, while others track broader crime trends.
“The president is right that the current system is broken, but he is wrong about the solutions,” said Jeremy Cherson, communications director for The Bail Project, a nonprofit advocacy organization. Criminal justice experts point to interconnected problems, such as mass incarceration, unequal sentencing across racial and socioeconomic groups, overcrowded and underfunded prisons, and overreliance on plea bargains, that contribute to larger systemic problems. “We know that bail reform works. It reduces unnecessary jail time, increases court appearance rates, and makes communities safer.”
What’s next?
If the president decides to withhold federal funds based on his executive orders, states will likely sue. States like Illinois say their laws are not affected by the executive orders.
President Trump’s August 25 executive order directed the Justice Department to provide within 30 days a list of places that have “substantially eliminated cash bail” for “crimes that pose a clear threat to public safety and order.” If this list is made public, it is likely to intensify the legal fights – and constitute a new test of the power Washington has to shape local criminal justice policy.
