Missed court appearances are costly for both court systems and court users. Court users and their families may be assessed fines, arrested or serve jail time, while the system pays …
On April 20, 2023 the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, Office of Justice Programs, and Office for Access to Justice revised the 2016 Dear Colleague to include an updated discussion …
In January 2023, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Prisons proposed a shocking amendment that would confiscate 75 percent of outside contributions to an incarcerated person’s commissary account to pay off …
Collateral consequences refers to the adverse effects resulting from an interaction with the justice system. Even youth with the lowest level of engagement with the system face collateral consequences that …
The use of fines and fees to generate revenue can be exploitative and a conflict of interest when relied on as an essential source of revenue. Using data from the …
The Council on Policing Reforms and Race released more than fifty recommendations to address policing and public safety. The Council is an independent, non-partisan initiative formed by the National Policing …
This report examines statutes and rules from all 50 states and D.C. to determine whether their codes authorize fees for electronic monitoring at any point in the justice system and to what extent. It explores statutes related to both pretrial release and post-sentencing supervision, the fee amounts authorized, consequences for nonpayment and, to a limited extent, fees at the local level.
Poor Not Guilty: The Fines and Fees Challenge is an interactive educational tool based on a series of real-life experiences that highlight how fines and fees for petty offenses often create impossible situations for those experiencing poverty and/or homelessness.
This local policy guide gives local leaders a recommended process for eliminating fees via local legislation, budgetary processes and through the courts.