Ability to Pay Archives - Page 4 of 18 - Fines and Fees Justice Center

LFO (Legal Financial Obligations) Calculator (State of Washington)

With the help of Microsoft and a Department of Justice grant, the state of Washington launched a web-based Calculator to enable judges, defendants, and public defenders to calculate fines and fees owed.

Report of the New Jersey Supreme Court Committee on Municipal Court Operations, Fines, and Fees

This report is a result of a comprehensive review of New Jersey municipal courts by the Supreme Court Committee on Municipal Court Operations, Fines, and Fees.

Black Love Resists in the Rust v. City of Buffalo

This case alleges that the City of Buffalo uses vehicle checkpoints in Black and Latino communities to generate revenue.

Abstention in the Time of Ferguson

The author argues for an exception to the Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971) abstention doctrine (Younger abstention) in cases challenging the criminalization of poverty.

Johnson, et al. v. Jessup

Plaintiffs allege that the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles automatically revokes the drivers’ licenses of people who do not pay their traffic tickets in full within forty days.

Monetary Myopia: An Examination of Institutional Response to Revenue From Monetary Sanctions for Misdemeanors

This study assesses the use of fines and fees for misdemeanor crimes in Nevada and Iowa to highlight the perverse incentives embedded in the practice of using courts as revenue centers. The article proposes the concept of “monetary myopia,” or a short-sighted focus on revenue at the expense of other concerns, to explain the states’ behavior.

Penalty Assessment Funds – California’s Penalties and Fees Provide Inconsistent Funding for State and County Programs and Have a Significant Financial Impact on Drivers

This report reveals that California programs and services supported by revenue from fines and fees have been compromised by low-income motorists’ inability to pay those fines and fees.

McNeil v. Community Probation Services

Community Probation Services, LLC and PSI Probation, LLC, for-profit probation companies, provide probation services for Giles County, Tennessee. The companies add their own fees and surcharges to the court debts of probationers.

Resolution Addressing Fines, Fees, and Costs in Juvenile Courts [Resolution and Bench Card]

The National Council of Juvenile Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) passed a resolution advocating for the reduction or elimination of fines and fees in juvenile courts. The resolution was published alongside a judicial bench card that outlines types of financial obligations that youth and families may encounter in juvenile and family court, details the impacts of those obligations, and explains how judges can address fines and fees in their own courtrooms. The bench card includes several practice recommendations for juvenile and family court judges.

Minnesota HF 3357: Reduction or waiver of the criminal and traffic surcharge authorized; courts required to consider indigency or hardship before imposing fines, fees, or surcharges; and notice required.

This bill would allow courts to reduce or waive fines and fees imposed on defendants in criminal and traffic court, require courts to consider ability to pay before sentencing a defendant to pay a fine or fee, and require that traffic tickets inform recipients of the court’s ability to waive or reduce fines and fees.