Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » Legal fight over the meaning of bail
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Legal fight over the meaning of bail

Tuesday, Dec 13, 2022 - Posted by Rich Miller

* From the Illinois Constitution

All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for the following offenses where the proof is evident or the presumption great: capital offenses; offenses for which a sentence of life imprisonment may be imposed as a consequence of conviction; and felony offenses for which a sentence of imprisonment, without conditional and revocable release, shall be imposed by law as a consequence of conviction, when the court, after a hearing, determines that release of the offender would pose a real and present threat to the physical safety of any person.

That passage is at the heart of the state’s attorneys’ lawsuit challenging the SAFE-T Act’s constitutionality

Lawyers for the sheriffs and prosecutors have insisted in their briefs that, “The Illinois Constitution interprets bail, at its core, to include a monetary amount that, though it may take different forms, cannot be abolished altogether without running afoul of the Constitution.”

State lawyers say their opponents have misread the document. Lawmakers sought to clarify things earlier this month, changing the law to note that the “sureties” at issue are meant to be “nonmonetary in nature.”

Still, that doesn’t change the meaning “in the Constitution itself,” the opponents noted in their new brief. […]

“It doesn’t have to be money,” said [Ann Lousin, a professor of law at University of Illinois Chicago Law School who lectures and consults on the Illinois constitution], who also worked on the drafting of the 1970 state constitution. […]

Whether these questions are even hashed out before Cunnington remains to be seen. State lawyers argue the judge shouldn’t consider the sureties question on its merits. They argue that the constitution’s “sufficient sureties” requirement is a right bestowed on criminal defendants — meaning prosecutors and sheriffs can’t claim it as a violated right of their own.

* As I’ve told you before, the Illinois Supreme Court’s Commission on Pretrial Practices defined bail this way in its final report

Bail: The process of releasing a defendant from custody with conditions set to reasonably assure public safety and court appearance. […]

“Bail” is often used to refer to the amount of cash that a defendant must post as a condition of release. “Bond” is sometimes treated as a synonym of “bail.” Understood properly, “bail” – which literally means, “release” – is a process of releasing a defendant from custody on conditions designed to assure both public safety and the person’s appearance in court. A “bond” occurs whenever a defendant enters an agreement with the court. The agreement may, but need not necessarily, include a financial condition, but can also or instead include a variety of other conditions such as electronic monitoring, curfews, supervised visits or appointments, etc.

       

23 Comments
  1. - Big Dipper - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 1:56 pm:

    How would prosecutors have standing to argue that eliminating bail would harm criminal defendants? It just seems like grasping at straws. First we heard that the law was not tough enough on crime and now it’s too tough?


  2. - Donnie Elgin - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:12 pm:

    “As I’ve told you before, the Illinois Supreme Court’s Commission on Pretrial Practices”

    Commissions even ones convened by the Illinois Supreme Court are regulatory in nature. They do not carry the weight of determining blackletter law that legislation would, nor do they carry precedence that a decided Supreme Court case would. The key here would be what is/was the meaning of the word “sureties” in relation to bail at the time of the 1970 Constitution.


  3. - @misterjayem - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:12 pm:

    The police and prosecutors don’t want their ill-gotten, bail bond windfall to go away.

    Unfortunately for them, Section 9 of the Illinois Construction explicitly grants rights to the accused, not to cops and SAs.

    If the cops and SAs believe they have a constitutional right to their bail bond gravy-train, they’ll have to find it elsewhere.

    – MrJM


  4. - charles in charge - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:13 pm:

    Pretty weak stuff by the State’s Attorneys.


  5. - NIU Grad - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:16 pm:

    Excessively proud SA’s wasting their respective county’s time and resources.


  6. - Gfalkes - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:18 pm:

    So bail means release. So why didn’t the constitution say release when it said bail and vice versa. Unless the the constitution meant the language to be different. In the end it doesn’t matter. SCOTIL gonna do what SCOTIL gonna do.


  7. - Streator Curmudgeon - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:19 pm:

    This may be a side issue, but in LaSalle County, one of the commonest arrests is failure to appear in court when scheduled.

    While I agree with the idea that cash bail discriminates against the poor, if people are skipping court dates now, what will motivate them if cash bail is eliminated?


  8. - Amalia - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:21 pm:

    so what was said during the Const.convention debate on sureties? what did they mean by sureties? anything said? and then there is the rest of the section on bail which sounds definitive on certain types of crime. the discussion of that would be illuminating.


  9. - ArchPundit - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:28 pm:

    ===Excessively proud SA’s wasting their respective county’s time and resources.

    Especially after hearing how SAFE-T was going to make it impossible to keep up with the workload.


  10. - Socially DIstant watcher - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:28 pm:

    I still can’t get past the admission by a state’s attorney that the bail question is largely about collections. Making defendants post cash before a trial means they can deduct fines before refunding the cash. And that’s why they want to lock up poor people.


  11. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:30 pm:

    ===the word “sureties” in relation to bail at the time of the 1970 Constitution===

    And one of the top state constitutional experts gave you your answer, but you ignored it, as usual.


  12. - Anyone Remember - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:32 pm:

    “This may be a side issue, but in LaSalle County, one of the commonest arrests is failure to appear in court when scheduled.”

    What percentage of those are traffic tickets?


  13. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 2:37 pm:

    ===why didn’t the constitution say release when it said bail ===

    Read: “bail” – which literally means, “release”


  14. - Anyone Remember - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 3:01 pm:

    “It claims lawmakers who passed the law violated a rule that requires them to read bills ‘on three different days’ in each legislative chamber.”

    Think this is before my time in Illinois, but didn’t the Illinois Courts once refuse to invalidate statutory changes, refusing to say a “legislative day” was the same as a “24 hour day” ??


  15. - Anon - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 3:35 pm:

    ===why didn’t the constitution say release when it said bail ===
    Also, that language carried over from the 1870 constitution, so that’s probably where to look for legislative history.


  16. - @misterjayem - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 3:50 pm:

    So why didn’t the constitution say release when it said bail and vice versa. Unless the the constitution meant the language to be different.

    Don’t they teach children about ’synonyms’ no more?

    – MrJM


  17. - TheInvisibleMan - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 3:50 pm:

    The wheels have already fallen off this lawsuit. After it was consolidated in October, it was first supposed to be decided on the claim for injunctive relief until the case was fully resolved, back in November. Then it was moved to the 1st week in December. Now the start has been moved to the 3rd week in December. I haven’t looked at the amended filing yet, but there doesn’t even seem to be any mention of seeking injunctive relief(TRO) anymore.

    It’s pretty clear none of the SAs bothered to think ahead to an outcome of what happens when they lose. The majority of SAs in the state are going to be told, by a court, that they do not understand the state constitution. In a rational world, that would be a problem for their continuing to work in that office.


  18. - rtov - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 3:51 pm:

    That oh that darn pesky constitution…


  19. - Chris - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 4:42 pm:

    Regarding “bail” v “release”:

    Bail is a *conditional* release. Just like the definition sez:

    “Releasing … with conditions”

    They are not synonymous; rather one is a subset of the other.

    Parole is also a form of release—why do we call it parole, instead of just “release”??

    Also: think the states attorneys pushing that elision are pulling a 2A type gambit—reading out “by sufficient sureties” has the same energy as reading out “well-regulated militia”.


  20. - Anon324 - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 4:44 pm:

    ==Think this is before my time in Illinois, but didn’t the Illinois Courts once refuse to invalidate statutory changes, refusing to say a “legislative day” was the same as a “24 hour day” ??==

    The bigger roadblock to the SAs and sheriffs is that Illinois follows the enrolled bill rule. SCOTIL has upheld that on numerous occasions. I do think a large amount of the ongoing litigation relates to the fact that the suit was filed pre-election, when there was a hope that the Court would be majority Republican and willing to overturn the act. But at this point, a lot of these arguments serve no purpose beyond a desire of politicians (and yes, SAs and sheriffs are politicians) to bolster their bona fides with their constituents.

    Somewhat interestingly, and tying this with the original topic of “sureties,” is this passage from an article by Michael Kasper in the Loyola University Law Review on using Article IV to challenge laws as unconstitutional:

    “Practitioners should note that these claims should be omitted from constitutional attacks on legislation because their inclusion betrays that the party bringing the challenge does not fully comprehend the enrolled bill rule and its effect. Thus, the inclusion of a three readings claim is likely to raise suspicion, if not skepticism, regarding other challenges…”


  21. - duck duck goose - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 4:48 pm:

    Well, that’s a bat-guano insane reading of the constitution. That would make it a constitutional violation to release anyone on their own recognizance.


  22. - The Opinions Bureau - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 4:51 pm:

    ===This may be a side issue, but in LaSalle County, one of the commonest arrests is failure to appear in court when scheduled.

    While I agree with the idea that cash bail discriminates against the poor, if people are skipping court dates now, what will motivate them if cash bail is eliminated?===

    There is oodles of research on how to reduce rates of failures to appear. The notion that fear of losing their bond money is the primary motivation for people to appear in court is misplaced as is the idea that most people accused of a crime will fail to appear without it. People are far more likely to miss because they can’t afford to skip work, secure childcare, lack transportation, or simply don’t remember or understand their responsibilities.

    The statewide office of pretrial services should help bring things like clearly-written summons and text message alerts about court dates to every circuit. Pretty simple fixes can yield big results.

    https://urbanlabs.uchicago.edu/programs/effective-policies-reduce-the-harm-of-failure-to-appear-fta

    https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/234370.pdf


  23. - H-W - Tuesday, Dec 13, 22 @ 4:55 pm:

    @Donnie Elgin

    Your preference and that of the States Attorneys and Sheriffs is a far cry more removed from the parsimonious interpretation and spirit of the 1970 Illinois Constitution, than that of the Court’s commission. Nothing in the language of our state constitution leads anyone to conclude money was assumed. It just isn’t there.

    The State’s Attorneys need to stop wasting County taxes (the source of their actual wages filling a frivolous case. I hope county residents everywhere remember this tantrum when we elect them.


Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.


* Uber’s Local Partnership = Stress-Free Travel For Paratransit Riders
* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* Caption contest!
* Pritzker calls on new CPS president to resign, citing 'antisemitism, misogyny, fringe conspiracy theories' (Resignation reported)
* Happy Halloween!
* Roundup: Madigan corruption trial
* Question of the day
* The word 'voters' is doing a lot of heavy lifting in these 'voter confidence' stories
* Showcasing The Retailers Who Make Illinois Work
* Open thread
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today's edition
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Live coverage
* Selected press releases (Live updates)
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller