2019 New York Bail Reform
Uploaded by kpb81 on Mar 25, 2022
Kevin P. Boyle
Dr. Margaret Artman
SP21-Advanced English Composition
The 2019 New York State Bail Reform: Civil Rights Victory, or Societal Threat?
A landmark reform to bail and pre-trial detention was passed in New York State in 2019. Advocacy groups herald it as a progressive step in the right direction for racial equity in the criminal justice system, and is the first shift we’ve seen toward a due process ideology in recent decades. This has both social and societal significance: before 2020, it was common for black, brown, and economically challenged defendants to be detained indefinitely prior to their trial. While proponents think it is a momentous move forward, there has been backlash. Politicians, law enforcement and the public believe it went too far, and the result would be a crime-spree, as ALL “criminals” are released back into the public. Does bail reform while leveling the playing field for racial and monetary inequality promote recidivism, like many claim? The pushback generated is from emotions, misinformation, and politics. It is too soon to determine whether bail reform has caused recidivism, and the proper statistics do not exist. Although, the outcry has already caused some rollbacks to the initial bill.
To understand the topic, one must have basic contextual and historical knowledge regarding bail, how it pertains to criminal justice, and the Constitution itself. One of the most important tenets of American criminal law has always been that an accused person is innocent until proven guilty (qtd. in Arnaud and Sims-Agbabiska 5). What this means in theory is that a defendant should not be punished for an alleged crime until pleading guilt, or being found guilty by a jury of their peers. The Fifth Amendment guarantees that "[n]o person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law."(qtd. in Caroll 757)
Interpretation of the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment is thus twofold: substantive and procedural. Substantive due process recognizes that some rights are so fundamental that government actors cannot deprive individuals of these rights unless the state can only narrowly prove that infringement is necessary to a state interest. The Court has characterized such a right as “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” and “deeply rooted” in American tradition (qtd. in Caroll 782).
Differing from its substantive counterpart, procedural due process is concerned with the process by which the...