Abstract
The racial and social injustices of the United States are apparent throughout the legal system, considering who the criminals are and who decides what makes one a criminal. In the absence of the unfair drafting of legislation to punish some and not others, the lack of a solid financial position further disadvantages the average individual arrested in the United States. Economic disadvantage creates a disparity in the equal administration of justice, whereby the financially stable seem to escape justice system involvement while the poor become stuck in a perpetual cycle. Christine S. Scott-Hayward and Henry F. Fradella argue that one of the significant causes of inequality in pretrial detention is access to finances. Money affords the ability to pay monetary bail and the ability to hire an attorney in reasonable time to negotiate appropriate bail amounts. Accordingly, a central thesis of Punishing Poverty is that—in addition to other factors relevant to nonmonetary bail release decisions—there should be an evaluation of the accused’s ability to pay a set bail amount.
Punishing Poverty begins with an introduction on the purpose of bail, the waves of bail reform, and a detailed road map of the chapters. The authors format the book in part to an extended essay that is relatively easy to read. The text is organized through several chapters that reflect central ideas like: “The Origins and History of Bail in the Common Law Tradition,” “Pretrial Release Decisions and Outcomes,” “The Problems With Risk-Assessment-Based Bail Determinations,” “The Impact of Pretrial Detention,” and “The Path Forward.” The previews at the beginning of each chapter provide a detailed awareness of forthcoming information, while concluding summaries reiterate key concepts the authors hope to convey.
Scott-Hayward and Fradella emphasized that the purpose of bail was to ensure the court that the defendant returned for the trial or sentencing. However, they further argue such logic is undermined when considering bail functions as a punishment mainly for the impoverished. The statistics of monetary bail reveal that males, Black, and LatinX individuals tend to get higher set bail amounts than wealthier, affluent, White counterparts—even when criminal history and public safety are considered. Studies have found that extralegal factors (not sanctioned by law, like race or ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, age, family ties, and community involvement) are more relevant in discerning whether a defendant will appear for court. Furthermore, bail schedules fail because judges cannot give each defendant individual attention. Generally, judges make decisions through a lens of bias related to a defendant’s race or ethnicity, forcing the bailee to enlist assistance from for-profit bail agencies or be detained.
One reason reoccurring disadvantages of current bail practices continue to dominate the American Judicial System is because bail alone is not a constitutional right. The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects citizens against excessive bail; however, the Constitution does not clarify boundaries in which judges must operate. For example, the subjective nature of bail and the absence of a right to bail allows bail hearings to last less than 60 s. Short bail hearings cause defendants to spend more time securing bail from a bond agent or family than the amount of time the judge uses to consider the risks defendants pose to themselves, the community the defendant resides in, and the general public. Accordingly, it is plausible to assume that in the interest of expediency, the quality of bail decisions likely suffers. The lack of individualized attention in assessing the risks for bail has provided excessive de facto money bonds against the poor, even for misdemeanor offenses.
The politicized and for-profit systems set in place for the poor to achieve monetary bail effectively prevent legislators from ending cash bail. Politicians that advocate for tough-on-crime systems necessitate bail bond agencies. However, if there were a systematic reduction or elimination of cash bail, agents that benefit from the poor’s inability to afford bail would suffer. Community nonprofit bail funds attempt to bridge the gap between the rich and poor in the legal system. However, the courts’ unwillingness to consider an accused individual’s financial stability and prosocial support systems perpetuate imbalance and the punishment of poverty. Though technology via biometrics and GPS monitoring has not been entirely effective in reducing reoffending, or the risk to the community, even a small dent in the need for pretrial detention is better than excessive bail amounts.
Punishing Poverty is a compelling narrative purposed to describe and evaluate the historical and present use of monetary bail in the United States. The writing provides a statistical analysis of the effect monetary bail has on average citizens, juxtaposed with the authors’ opinion on bail reform and the perception of judicial and legislative officials on bail and bail hearings. This book relies on various bodies of literature to support the point that the current bail systems are ineffective and, in ways, harmful toward the average citizen. The reader can be educated and given the proper tools to provide an opinion in support of or in opposition to the current bail systems. In addition to education, necessary information to consider the amendment of bail legislation for a fair justice system is provided throughout the text. Punishing Poverty is useful for judicial and legislative officials, students, academics, and residents/citizens of the United States. Academically, upper level high school students, undergraduate students, and graduate students could benefit from engaging with this book. Specifically, students interested in or currently pursuing careers in criminology, criminal justice, sociology, and social work can benefit from a study of Punishing Poverty.
