Privatization throughout the justice system has exacerbated the cycle of mandatory fees, nonpayment, and consequent additional fees. Private companies, often with little to no oversight, can have economic incentives to …
FFJC has released a set of policy recommendations to help stem the harms of this ongoing public health and economic crisis. This page also tracks state and local fines and fees reform efforts undertaken in response to coronavirus.
FFJC is compiling advocacy materials for organizations and community members across America who are working toward fines and fees policy changes in response to the coronavirus pandemic. Below, you can …
This literature review surveys articles published in the University of California, Los Angeles Criminal Justice Law Review that discuss how court fines and fees may be viewed as predatory.
This article discusses how people who are court-ordered to participate in electronic monitoring bear the burden of the program costs and the risk of being jailed for nonpayment.
For the first time, the Federal Reserve collected information about how criminal legal debt from fines and fees affects American families.
This report, including an interactive map, provides a 50-state analysis of state laws that regulate municipal imposition and collection of fines and fees. The analysis is based on 52 factors, organized into 7 broad categories, that measure the extent to which state laws “prohibit, sustain, encourage or neutralize” municipal reliance on fines and fees.
Alexes Harris, the author of this research papers, discusses various criminal legal system fines and fees and argues that imposing these costs can worsen social inequality.
This opinion from the American Bar Association addresses the obligations judges have to assess ability to pay when collecting fines and fees.
This report investigates the amount of time and resources the court system spends to assess and collect criminal fines and fees.