Bail disreform advances

Bad.

The Texas House on Monday advanced a sweeping package to crack down on bail laws, setting a longtime priority of Gov. Greg Abbott’s — to keep more dangerous people accused of violent crimes behind bars — on its clearest path to passage in years.

Lawmakers adopted the package’s centerpiece proposal asking voters to amend the state Constitution to create a list of violent offenses for which, in certain cases, judges must deny bail. Once the Senate concurs on the House’s version, as expected, the measure will be placed before voters on November’s ballot.

But a constitutional amendment to automatically deny bail to any unauthorized migrant accused of certain felonies failed to win the 100 votes required for passage. Because it received support from a majority, 88 to 50, it will have one more shot at adoption this week.

And the House gave initial approval to Senate Bill 9, which would restrict who is eligible for release on cashless personal bonds and allow the state to appeal bail decisions, leaving a defendant jailed for up to 20 days as the appeal is litigated. House lawmakers also advanced Senate Bill 40, which would bar municipalities from using public funds to bail defendants out of jail. Both bills must pass the House once more before going to the Senate, which has already passed its versions of the legislation.

Under the state Constitution, almost everyone who is arrested has the right to be released on bail. The limited exceptions are people charged with capital murder and those accused of certain repeat felonies or bail violations. According to the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court, bail cannot be excessive, and pretrial detention largely should not be considered the default, as criminal defendants are still legally presumed innocent.

Rep. John Smithee, R-Amarillo and chair of the House Criminal Jurisprudence committee, argued that stricter bail laws were necessary to protect the public from crime committed by dangerous defendants out on bail.

“I’ve never voted on any legislation more important than what we’re getting ready to consider, because it holds the very key to life or death of some very wonderful people, some very innocent people,” he said, telling lawmakers about the families of violent crime victims he had spoken to. “This is what crime has done to some of our families. And what all of these cases and so many more have in common is, they are a result of what Governor Abbott has described as a broken bail system.”

“It may not be perfect, but it’s the best we could do to fix a system that’s been broken for a long time,” Smithee added. “We’ve been working on this for 10 years now, and it’s finally time to get this done.”

The House’s approval of the bail package marks a significant victory for Abbott, who has made tightening the state’s bail laws an emergency item for three consecutive sessions. While lawmakers have previously approved more modest measures limiting the use of cashless bonds, more expansive proposals to overhaul the state’s bail laws have repeatedly died in the lower chamber.

[…]

“We wouldn’t be here if there weren’t real life examples of people being released who plainly should not have been,” said Rep. Joe Moody of El Paso, the lead Democratic negotiator, adding that he was committed to addressing low-level offenders locked behind bars simply because they could not afford their bail.

“That’s how the bail reform conversation started a decade ago,” he said. “For every improperly released defendant who commits a serious crime, there’s 100 low-level offenders held when they shouldn’t be, whose lives are upended. We need to do both.”

Top Republicans and Democrats spent weeks negotiating a package that could gain traction across parties, and they ultimately produced legislation more stringent than initially proposed even while narrowing the types of defendants who would be subject to the harsher rules.

Republicans cast the issue as one of life-or-death, arguing that stricter bail laws are necessary to keep dangerous defendants locked up and to hold judges accountable. They pointed to numerous examples of violent crime committed by people let out on bond, and highlighted the stories of victims and their loved ones.

Civil rights groups and some Democrats, meanwhile, argued that the measures tied the hands of judges and infringed on the civil rights of anyone accused of certain crimes.

Senate Joint Resolution 5, which would require judges to deny bail in certain cases, was approved overwhelmingly, 133 to eight — winning approval by a larger margin than a less stringent proposal in 2021. That legislation, House Joint Resolution 4, was approved 104 to 35, but failed as a casualty of a Democratic walkout over a voting bill.

As approved by the House, SJR 5 goes further than the Senate’s original proposal by requiring judges to deny bail in certain cases, rather than simply giving them the discretion to do so.

As long as some people are allowed to post bail, there will be those who commit crimes while out. The only way to ensure that doesn’t happen is to keep literally everyone locked up until their cases are resolved, and that’s plainly unconstitutional as well as being morally indefensible. What this will do, in addition to being great for the bail bond business, is lock up a lot more people who pose little to no threat to anyone for no good reason. Some of them will die in jail, others will lose jobs and their families will suffer. None of them will get to tell their stories to Greg Abbott, who wouldn’t care about them anyway. And this will cost Harris County a bunch of money and make it that much harder to keep the jail population under control. I’ll be voting against these propositions when they’re on the ballot in November, and you should too. Reform Austin has more.

Related Posts:

This entry was posted in That's our Lege and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.