The United States is a very large and complex entity filled with diverse races, cultures, ideologies, philosophies, belief systems and perspectives. That said establishing a societal structure that encourages diversity and autonomy, but also establishes standards, rules and laws that outline the nation, is no easy feat. The American criminal justice system has been praised as one of the most ethical and just in comparison with other such systems across the globe. While that may have been true many years ago, many modern thinkers and American citizens, today feel that the criminal justice system is highly flawed and is no longer administering justice in equal, ethical and unbiased ways. While there are many aspects of the American criminal justice system that many would argue are in need of serious reconsideration and policy reforms as a whole, there are aspects the can be discussed individually. The American bail system, which allows many offenders or suspected offenders, who have not been tried, to spend that time until trial or sentencing outside of the jail, is not a just, ethical or equal option for all offenders who find themselves in the criminal justice system, regardless of their crimes. After reviewing the available research it becomes clear that there are six specific issues with the American bail system that makes it unjust and unethical, which include economic disparities, racial disparities, it contributes to the overcrowded American prison system, participates in the ethical conundrum of punishment should fit the crime, disregards potential threats to the public and, finally, the unemployment and welfare issues associated with not being able to afford bail creates greater class issues; all of these elements need to be addressed.
The American bail system is fairly simple. When someone is arrested for a crime, be it a minor misdemeanor or a serious felony, will likely being taken “downtown” and be placed into holding. When they are seen by the judge he or she will, based on the severity of their crime, assign a potential bail. Bail can range from a few hundred dollars to tens of thousands, in some cases. Most people cannot afford such an expenditure this high. The bail system was developed to allow offenders to pay a much smaller percentage of the cost and a bondsman will then guarantee the remaining amount (Feige 1). This allows many to leave jail until their trials. If someone on a bond does show up for the appointed court dates and does not pay the bond, then many bail bondsmen will hire bounty hunters to bring them in. This all seems like it would be beneficial to many, unfortunately, that is not the reality in the modern era; hence why the topic remains one of heavy and heated debates.
There is no such thing as a perfect system. There is always room to learn, change and adapt when it is necessary to do so. Given the general standing of the American criminal justice system in the eyes of the public reforms are long overdue and have been for some time. The bail system was intended to resolve a problem, but it has only increased the problems, in many cases. It is keeping the wrong people in and allowing the wrong people out, very often. The American bail system is in need of serious reform, policy reevaluations and the aspects of the system that are bias and unequal must be addressed (Laird 1). In order to understand the six elements that represent the disparities and issues associated with the bail system, it is best to discuss them individually.
Economic Disparities: There has been and continues to be an ever widening gap between the wealthy and poor of the United States. People who are poor, who are unlucky enough to find themselves in trouble with the law, even for the most minor of infractions, may find themselves offered a bail they cannot possible pay, even if it is not particularly high (Walsh 1). That said if two men were both pulled over for unpaid parking tickets, which is some states can result in jail time, arrive at the jail. One man is wealthy and the other is not. When the judge offers them the same bail, the wealthy man pays it and is free to go until his court date. However, the poor man cannot pay that amount, so he will have to remain in police custody until their trial date, which can take several months in some cases. That being said there is a is a serious double standard being presented. There are two different experiences of the criminal justice system, one for the wealthy and one for the poor. One man will be punished far more than another (Dolan and Karr 1-2).
Racial Disparities: Similar to the issues with the poor and the bail system is the case of race in the criminal justice system. Many of the people who live in poverty are, very often, minorities, which means that the gap between the rich and the poor regarding bail is also an issue of racial inequality as well. Racial issues in the criminal justice system are a very real and serious topic presently in the United States (Jones 919). More African American youths have interactions, initiated by police, with the law, are detained for crimes and are charged and are unable to afford bail. Meaning that people of different races and cultures are not receiving the same legal experience. They are more likely to be left in jail for longer periods of time, even if they are ultimately exonerated of the charges, than other offenders who were wealthy (Johnson and Johnson 44-45).
Overcrowded Prisons: There are a number of issues that contribute to the serious problem involving the overcrowded prisons in the United States in the modern era. The bail system is a part of that problem. Jail is an important aspect of the criminal justice system. Prisons are an ideal solution to punish and isolate people who committed violent, threatening and even murderous crimes. However, such criminals make up a small portion of incarcerated Americans. The bulk of the people in jails and prisons across the country are there for minor crimes that carry mandatory sentences forcing an non-negotiable sentence and those who have not even been found guilty are awaiting trial but could not afford the bail so they wait in prison. If something was done to improve the bail system we might see a distinct drop in the overcrowding statistics in the United States. That said the bail system in the United States is contributing not just social inequalities, but also causing other serious effects as well (Johnson and Johnson 47-48).
Ethically Questionable Standards: The laws in this country were designed to establish standards of law and order. If one breaks the laws then consequences can be expected. However, the goal was that the punishment should suit the nature of the crime. But if some people cannot afford bail and another can, then the punishment is not equal, not by a long shot. The purpose of the criminal justice system is to encourage compliance to laws, to punish those that violate them and protect the public from dangerous wrong-doers. However, that seems to become less relevant if the offender can afford to leave the jail (Feige 1). Just because one offender can afford bail it does not necessarily mean that the public safety is being considered; yet, that is the perspective shared when people ask about why so many offenders are kept until trial and claim it benefits public safety. But if the criminal is so threatening then why were they allowed to bail out but another was not. It appears to be less about justice being served and more about “money talks” (Walsh 1).
Disregards Potential Threats: There are instances where due to a cunning lawyer, which money often allots, the offender is allowed to pay his bail, however high, so that he will be free until he stands trial for his crime (Wiseman 1). There have been many serious criminals whose money earned them their freedom. However, many of these criminals have taken the opportunity and the rest of their money to facilitate an escape from persecution, often to other countries, where they are not able to be held accountable for their crime. More chilling is that there have been dangerous, but wealthy, offenders who have harmed others and not even hours after their bail was paid committed another similar crime, which they would not have been able to do it they had not been able to pay the bail. That being said the individual should be gauged and assessed regardless of whether or not he or she has the money to pay the bail. This is not only completely biased in favor of the wealthy, but it could on occasion place the general public in danger (Laird 1).
Unemployment & Stigma: People who are already considered to be poor usually have low paying jobs that barely meet their household needs. So when they find themselves in jail, again for the most minor of offenses, they cannot pay the bail, which means they will likely lose their jobs when they miss their shifts. Having been terminated from a job can make finding another more difficult (Laird 1). Many people who are worried about losing their jobs or the well-being of their family will agree to a plea bargain. A deal that allows the offender to plead guilty, have the conviction on their permanent record, in order to avoid jail time while waiting to see a judge for a offenses that may only result in fines and community service. So we have poor Americans pleading guilty to crimes they may not have committed in order to avoid being left in jail because they cannot afford to pay the bail that was set (Blume and Helm 2-3). Unemployment is one of the most serious issues in the United States today and for many Americans it is criminal records that can prevent them from finding stable and gainful employment. So in the case of the poor who plead guilty to avoid more jail will carry a stigma that could prevent them from caring for their families. Those who can make the bail do not have such worries because they can be with their families, go to work and earn a living while they await a court date. This an aspect of the bail system that is entirely bias and unfair. (Robinson and Williams 1)
There are many Americans today who are calling for the elimination of the bail system all together because of the disparities and biases that it has created and contributed to. The justice system is supposed to be an agreed upon contract with society that individuals will follow the laws established and, when and if, they do not there are fair but succinct punishment that will be appropriate to the crime committed. One was not supposed to be punished less or punished more than another solely based on one’s socioeconomic status. It was not supposed to be a system governed by money alone, but by an ethical and equal standard for all Americans regardless of socioeconomics, race, gender or belief system (Jones 919). The reality is that justice is not being handed down equally and that is not supposed to be tolerated in the United States of America. Given the facts it may even be contributing to placing dangerous criminals back into the public and preventing a father of six with a minimum wage job from keeping that job and providing for his family.
Many argue, again, that it is not the bail system alone that needs reform but the whole system from top to bottom. Unethical treatment from police, the bias nature of the court system and overcrowded prisons are something that the poor are more likely to experience than those who can take advantage of the bail system. By reforming or completely ending the system may force the hand of the establishment and force them to deal with all those other problems, because they would not have the bail system to stem the tide of cases they would receive and the number of prisoners they would have to contend with (Hutchison 1). Ending the bail system is a viable solution according to a number of experts. Doing so would leave no outlets but to address whether or not the criminal justice system is working effectively. After all without that bail system in place none of the prisons, from the smallest to greatest of crimes, will not be able to buy their freedom and the poor will still be present as well. Ending the bail system could be instrumental in improving the American criminal justice system. It would force the establishment to reevaluate their mandatory sentencing laws, relegate that some crimes will be handled through alternatives to prisons and release those inmates who genuinely do not benefit from incarceration. The bail system allows money to be the controlling factor in the criminal justice system instead of ethics, equality or a pursuit of justice for all (Jones 919-920).
It seems abundantly clear that the current concept and process of the modern American bail system is no longer functioning as beneficial, effective and is not serving the ethical foundations that the United States was founded upon. Once again a class systems have formed and the separation is widening. There are the wealthy that seem to enjoy privilege and greater advantage even if they have committed a crime, while most poor Americans are forced to endure longer jail time and far less options other than pleading guilty for something you may not have done. This is not how justice is served. If someone, rich, poor or somewhere in between, commits a crime then that punishment should be equal regardless of their societal standing, economic holdings and clout in legal circles. At the end of the day the American bail system does not endorse equality, it allows for the disparities to exist that are impacting many Americans negatively and reforms are not just encouraged, they are imperative.
WORK CITED
Blume, John H. and Rebecca K. Helm. “The Unexonerated: Factually Innocent Defendants Who
Plead Guilty.” Cornell Law Library. (2014): 1-45. Print.
Dolan, Karen and Jodi L. Karr. “ The Poor Get Prison: The Alarming Spread of the
Criminalization of Poverty.” Institute of Policy Studies. (2015): 1-35. Print.
Feige, David. “The Problem With Bail.” Slate Magazine. 1. Web. <
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/06/bail_is_unfair_here_s_a_simple_way_to_fix_it.html>.
Hutchison, Darren. “There’s Never Been A Better Time For Bail Reform.” The Washington
Post. (2015): 1. Web. <https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/07/20/theres-never-been-a-better-time-for-bail-reform/>.
Johnson, Marcia and Luckett Anthony Johnson. “Bail: Reforming Policies to Address
Overcrowded Jails, the Impact of Race on Detention, and Community Revival in Harris County, Texas.” Northwestern Journal of Law and Social Policy. 7.1 (2012): 43-90. Print.
Jones, Cynthia. “Give Us Free: Addressing Racial Disparities in Bail Determinations." Articles
in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals. 301. (2013): 919-963. Print.
Laird, Lorelai. “Court Systems Rethink The Use Of Financial Bail, Which Some Say Penalizes
The Poor.” American Bar Association Journal. (2016): 1. Web. < http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/courts_are_rethinking_bail>.
Robinson, Matthew and Marian Williams. “The Myth of a Fair Criminal Justice System.”
Justice Policy Journal.6.1 (2009):1-55. Print.
Walsh, Sadhbh. “America's Bail System: One Law For The Rich, Another For Poor.” The
Guardian. (2013): 1. Web. <http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/14/america-bail-system-law-rich-poor>.
Wiseman, Samuel R. “Pretrial Detention and the Right to Be Monitored.” The Yale Law Journal.
123. 5 (2014): 1. Web. < http://www.yalelawjournal.org/essay/pretrial-detention-and-the-right-to-be-monitored>.
