League of Women Voters of Park Ridge
League of Women Voters of Park Ridge
  • Home
  • About our League
    • About Us
    • Our Local History
    • Actions & Resources
    • Photo Gallery
  • Voter Services
  • Observer Corps
  • Get Involved
  • Events
  • Contact Us
  • Members Only
  • More
    • Home
    • About our League
      • About Us
      • Our Local History
      • Actions & Resources
      • Photo Gallery
    • Voter Services
    • Observer Corps
    • Get Involved
    • Events
    • Contact Us
    • Members Only
  • Sign In
  • Create Account

  • My Account
  • Signed in as:

  • filler@godaddy.com


  • My Account
  • Sign out


Signed in as:

filler@godaddy.com

  • Home
  • About our League
    • About Us
    • Our Local History
    • Actions & Resources
    • Photo Gallery
  • Voter Services
  • Observer Corps
  • Get Involved
  • Events
  • Contact Us
  • Members Only

Account


  • My Account
  • Sign out


  • Sign In
  • My Account

Criminal Justice reforms in illinois

Information on the Pretrial Fairness Act & the SAFE-T Act

October 2022


The mission of the League of Women Voters is to defend democracy through empowering voters. Voter

education is central to that mission. At the October 2022 meeting of the LWVPR, we discussed the

recent deluge of misinformation circulating this election season about criminal justice reforms in Illinois.


A summary of the issue is provided below, along with a fact-check of some misleading claims raised at

our meeting and a list of online resources for more information and data. Please use these resources to

promote accurate information-sharing about this significant piece of legislation and correct misleading

claims. A well-informed voter is an empowered voter.


Background on this Law:

The comprehensive piece of legislation was adopted in January of 2021 and is known as the Safety,

Accountability, Fairness, and Equity-Today Act, or SAFE-T Act. The portion of the Act that eliminates

cash bail (the Pretrial Fairness Act, or PFA) is scheduled to go into effect in January of 2023. Illinois will be the first state in the nation to completely eliminate money bail.


The call for pretrial reform has been many years in the making, in Illinois and nation-wide. The overall number of pretrial detainees has increased drastically over time, at a rate far higher than the general

imprisonment rate, nearly quadrupling since the 1980s (Prison Policy Initiative). The majority of pretrial detainees are charged with non-violent drug or property crimes (American Bar Association, 2019). In

Illinois, a striking 90% of people held in jail on any given day are being detained pretrial, meaning they have not yet been tried or convicted of a crime (ICJIA). Many pretrial detainees are, in fact, never convicted of a crime (e.g., 40% of felony cases in Cook County were dismissed in 2019, CCSA dashboard).


Overuse of custodial arrest as the response to social problems such as substance abuse has a

disproportionate effect on the poor. Many of those in pretrial detention remain so simply because of

their inability to post bond. A backlog of cases often results in lengthy detention for those without the

means to pay, leading to highly inequitable distribution of justice. The human costs of unnecessary

detention for low-level crimes and low-risk detainees are steep, including job loss, deepening poverty,

child custody crises, and worsening social instability. The financial costs to taxpayers is significant as

well. The cost of one day of jail in Cook County, for example, is $143 / person (ICIJIA). Criminal justice

reforms like the SAFE-T Act and PFA seek to address these longstanding problems.


Where We Stand as a League:

The League of Women Voters, at the national and state level, have established public policy positions

aligned with numerous components of the Pretrial Fairness Act and SAFE-T Act. In the fall of 2020 and

spring of 2021, the LWVPR participated in the process for creating consensus on our state-level criminal

justice position. LWVIL supports increased efforts to reduce bias in the criminal justice system and to

ensure more equal treatment for all citizens under state law. The League Program calls for action to

build trust and transparency between police and community members and encourage law enforcement

to use alternatives to custodial arrest when possible. LWVIL supports the elimination of cash bond,

encourages the use of pretrial procedures that utilize unbiased risk assessment, and advocates for

increased funding for prevention and treatment programs that can ease the burden on our criminal

justice system.


LWVIL 2021 – 2023 Program, Where We Stand: https://tinyurl.com/5yf6szf8

LWVIL video briefing on the Pretrial Fairness Act: https://youtu.be/3VJi_PCSGRw


FACT CHECK: SEPARATING FACTS FROM FICTION


Claim: Criminals cannot be detained upon arrest starting in January.

Fact: Incorrect. Those arrested on felony charges and Class A misdemeanors can still be detained and

held. The decision is made by a judge based on danger and flight risk. The Pretrial Fairness Act (PFA)

establishes new processes for pretrial release and detention decisions. Defendants will no longer have

the option to obtain release by paying a cash bond. Instead, a judge will make the determination to

detain or release defendants pending trial. No one will be able to obtain release through payment.

---------

Claim: The new law makes serious crimes like burglary, arson, kidnapping, and attempted murder “non-

detainable.”

Fact: False. The Act allows for pretrial detention under a very wide range of circumstances, including

crimes listed in misleading memes being circulated online. 725 ILCS 5/110-6.1(a)(1) specifically

identifies “any nonprobationable forcible felony” as eligible for pretrial detention, which includes (as

specified in 730 ILCS 5/5-5-3), residential burglary and arson, criminal sexual abuse, kidnapping of a

child, etc. Additionally, the law allows for judges to weigh many factors in the pretrial detention

decision, including whether the offense involved violence, a weapon, sexual assault, a victim from a

protected vulnerable class, etc. (including “any factors deemed by the court to have a reasonable

bearing on the defendant’s propensity or reputation for violence, abuse, or assaultive behavior.”)

---------

Claim: Bail reform was “snuck into law” in the middle of the night.

Facts: This legislation is the result of many years of work, with numerous stakeholders and

organizations. The Illinois General Assembly posts the entire legislative history of each bill online. The

details of HB3421 and HB3653 can be reviewed here: https://tinyurl.com/mrxyjdv5 and

https://tinyurl.com/jb8p99es. The first version of the Pretrial Fairness Act (HB3421) was introduced in

2017. 


That fall, five years ago, the Illinois Supreme Court created the Commission on Pretrial Practices to study

and provide comprehensive guidance on pretrial reforms. The task force was comprised of dozens of

members of the judiciary, prosecutors, and law enforcement. An excerpt from the Commission’s report

is provided below, and you can access the entire report at the following link:

https://tinyurl.com/22y5y8fj


“Following two years of studying best practices in use around the country, consulting pretrial

reform experts, listening to stakeholders throughout the state, and analyzing the myriad sources

of academic and professional analysis of pretrial issues, the Commission has completed its work.

The following recommendations to modify state laws, Supreme Court rules and policies, and the

practices and procedures and systems used in circuit courts throughout Illinois are designed to

1) ensure a fair, efficient, transparent, accountable and adequately-resourced system of pretrial

services; 2) use legal evidence-based practices; and 3) develop an operational structure that is

guided by the National Institute of Corrections’ A Framework for Pretrial Justice: Essential

Elements of a High Functioning Pretrial System and Agency.”


Subsequent versions of the legislation were considered throughout 2018 and 2019, and expert

testimony was heard during legislative hearings in April of 2019. Additional hearings on ending cash

bond and pretrial reforms were held in February and October of 2020. The Act passed both houses, after

much revision and debate, in January of 2021 and was signed by the Governor on February 22, 2021.

The full bill, with mark-ups, can be viewed here:

https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/101/PDF/101-0652.pdf

---------

Claim: 100 out of 102 State’s Attorneys oppose the Act.

Facts: This claim is being widely shared, with no accompanying supportive evidence (e.g., “those

involved say...”). It is true that several SAs have expressed strong opposition, going so far as to bring

lawsuits, including Will County State’s Attorney, James Glaslow. That said, many State’s Attorneys have

asked for clarifications and amendments, not repeal. For example, DuPage County State’s Attorney, Bob

Berlin, stated: “Many of us [State’s Attorneys] are not just saying, ‘repeal the whole thing, just get rid of

it.’” (https://capitolfax.com/2022/08/23/more-debate-over-cashless-bail/ )

---------

Claim: The legislation is anti-police.

Facts: The SAFE-T Act is comprehensive in scope and was created with input from law enforcement

agencies throughout the state. To support the reforms, the Fiscal Year budget for 2023 includes $10

million for a local law enforcement retention program. The reforms in the SAFE-T Act support ethical

police conduct. Law enforcement input has led to several amendments since the bill was first

introduced. The Act includes improvements to police training, a police certification system,

requirements for body-worn cameras, confidential mental health services for officers, and

whistleblower protections. Various law enforcement groups and police unions have opposed the

legislation, calling it an “anti-police” bill and taking objection to revised use-of-force standards, body

camera requirements, and other components. These sentiments are not universal, however, as

illustrated in this quote from the former president of the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police:

“Let me make it clear to you that the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police is not against

the SAFE-T Act (because) we have put countless hours in collaborating with elected officials,” Hazel Crest Police Chief Mitchell Davis said at a news conference earlier this year. Davis was the president of the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police during the bill’s passage. (source: https://www.capitolnewsillinois.com/NEWS/whats-in-the-safe-t-act-a-look-at-the-2021-criminal-justice-reform-and-how-it-has-evolved )

--------

Claim: The police will not be able remove people who trespass on your property.

Facts: This claim stems from the fact that trespassing is sometimes a lower-level misdemeanor crime

(e.g., squatting on land, Class B or C). The Act calls for alternatives to custodial arrest for low-level crimes (petty offenses and Class B or C misdemeanors). That said, most trespassing offenses are actually higher-level offenses, either Class A misdemeanors or felonies (see 720 ILCS 5/Articles 19-4 and 21), including residential trespass if persons are present, criminal trespass to vehicles, safe school zones,

airports, state supported lands, and place of public amusement. This is one of the points of confusion

that has led some State’s Attorneys to ask for more specificity / clarify in certain provisions in the Act

prior to its full implementation in January. That said, the Act, as written, allows for detention of anyone

“deemed to pose a treat to any person(s) or the community, or if they have any obvious medical or

mental health issues that post a risk to their own safety.” Furthermore, oversight boards were created

as part of the Act to monitor and address any aspects of the law that need further refinement.

---------

Claim: This law is already increasing crime in Chicago. People out on pretrial release will commit further

crimes with no accountability.

Facts: The data available from Illinois as well as other states which have initiated initial bail reforms do

not support this claim. Some individuals on pretrial release have reoffended, but the rate is not

disproportionately high. The Civic Federation reference provided below, for example, reports that 3.3% of the 70,000 people out on pretrial release were charged with a new violent crime or crime against a

person (e.g., assault). 81.8% were not charged with any new offenses during pretrial release.


RESOURCES AND WEBSITES FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:


The website of the League of Women Voters of Glenview-Glencoe provides a succinct summary of the

Pretrial Fairness Act and helpful links to background information, including several video links and

factsheets: https://www.lwvglens.org/pretrial-fairness-act


See below for direct links to data and additional details from government agencies, non-profit

organizations, and legal and professional organizations.


American Bar Association: Examines the inequitable outcomes associated with cash bond:

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/economic-

justice/criminal-justice-debt-problems/


Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts: Report on outcomes of electronic monitoring programs in

Cook County: https://www.chicagoappleseed.org/2021/09/22/10-facts-about-pretrial-electronic-

monitoring-in-cook-county/


Cook County State’s Attorney: Data dashboard:

https://www.cookcountystatesattorney.org/about/felony-dashboard


Circuit Court of Cook County: Since the initial bail reforms enacted in September of 2017, the Circuit

Court has monitored implementation and outcomes (including court appearance rate, risk for new

criminal activity, etc.). Quarterly data dashboards are available here:

https://www.cookcountycourt.org/HOME/Model-Bond-Court-Initiative


IllinoisCourts.Gov: The Illinois Supreme Court established an Office of Statewide Pretrial Services to

assist all counties in implementation. The Pretrial Implementation Task Force and subcommittees (made

up of judges, sheriffs, police chiefs, victim rights advocates, among other experts) is working actively to

prepare all justice system partners for these changes. You can read on those preparations here:

https://www.illinoiscourts.gov/courts/additional-resources/pretrial-implementation-task-force/


Loyola University / MacArthur Foundation: Report on impact of pretrial reforms:

https://safetyandjusticechallenge.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Report-Dollars-and-Sense-in-Cook-County.pdf


Data on Illinois pretrial detention practices (average length of detention etc.):

https://loyolaccj.org/pfa/blog/pfa-jail


University of Chicago Urban Labs: Data on electronic monitoring:

https://urbanlabs.uchicago.edu/projects/a-deeper-look-at-what-the-data-tells-us-about-electronic-monitoring-in-chicago


Civic Federation (independent, non-partisan government research organization):

https://www.civicfed.org/blog/what-data-tell-us-about-bail-reform-and-crime-cook-county


Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (ICJIA): The ICJIA is tasked with implementing several of

the Act’s provisions. This website provides a useful overview of the Act’s provisions and information on

their roles and responsibilities in its implementation: https://icjia.illinois.gov/researchhub/articles/the-2021-safe-t-act-icjia-roles-and-responsibilities


ICJIA article on the reasons for reform efforts: https://icjia.illinois.gov/researchhub/articles/an-examination-of-illinois-and-national-pretrial-practices-detention-and-reform-efforts


Prison Policy Initiative: Data on the costs of pretrial detention:

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/research/pretrial_detention/


Illinois Justice Project: Statement in support of the legislation: https://www.iljp.org/statement


Campaign for Pretrial Justice: Comprehensive website to advocate for pretrial reforms. Includes links

to contact legislators. https://pretrialfairness.org/


Risk assessment tools: https://news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicago/illinois-criminal-justice-reform-law-eliminates-bail-but-doesnt-erase-bias-in-risk-assessment-for-pretrial-imprisonment/


* This document is provided to members as an educational resource and is not an official position

statement of the LWVPR. See the LWVIL 2021-2023 Program for the League’s official position statements related to these issues.

Copyright © 2017 League of Women Voters -  http://www.lwv.org  All Rights Reserved.

  • Our Positions
  • Newsletters
  • Contact Us