Ability to Pay Archives - Fines and Fees Justice Center

Municipal Fines and Fees: A 50-State Survey of State Laws

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.

Ethical Obligations of Judges in Collecting Legal Financial Obligations and Other Debts

This opinion from the American Bar Association addresses the obligations judges have to assess ability to pay when collecting fines and fees.

Fant et al. v. City of Ferguson

The City of Ferguson jails people when they cannot afford to pay their traffic debt and cash bonds for other minor offenses. No inquiry is made into the person’s ability to pay, no alternatives to payment are offered to the individuals, and no counsel is provided.

Georgia State Conference of the NAACP et al. v. City of LaGrange, Georgia

Individuals must pay their unrelated LaGrange Municipal court fines and fees before gaining access to basic utility services. Further, the City charges $50 for a public defender. Unable to pay for a public defender, most people plead guilty or nolo contendere.

Maryland HB 1178: Pilot Project for Income-Based Fines (Fair Fines Act of 2020)

This bill requires Maryland courts to establish a base fine for motor vehicle violations and use a formula to determine the amount an individual must pay.

Nashville Community Bail Fund v. Howard Gentry

The policies created by Gentry’s office require people to remain incarcerated until their trial unless the person(s) posting cash bonds on their behalf sign a form acknowledging, in writing, notice of and agreement to garnishment of the cash bond deposit.

Feenstra v. Sigler

The complaint alleges Judge Jared Sigler, Judge John Gerkin, and former Judge Curtis DeLapp (Judicial Defendants) failed to conduct inquiries into individuals’ ability to pay before imposing fines and fees or before sanctioning individuals for nonpayment.

Edwards v. Leaders in Community Alternatives

Alameda County contracts with Leaders in Community Alternatives (LCA) to provide court-ordered GPS tracking and alcohol monitoring devices for people on pre-trial or home detention. Although LCA is supposed to charge fees on a sliding scale based on a person’s ability to pay, LCA does not adjust its fees based on a person’s actual financial circumstances and never informs people that reduced fees are available.

Can’t Win For Losing – How Institutions and Policies Keep Arkansans in Debt

This report presents the findings from an Arkansas Community Institute survey concerning the household debt of Pulaski and Jefferson county residents.

The Steep Costs of Criminal Justice Fees and Fines, A Fiscal Analysis of Three States and Ten Counties

This Brennan Center research report analyzes the numerous disadvantages of the current criminal justice fine and fee systems of ten counties in Texas, Florida, and New Mexico.