ArchCity Defenders and co-counsel filed a suit in federal court on Monday, January 28 that seeks to undo St. Louis’ current system of pretrial detention, which they claim “violates plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment rights to equal protection and due process through a policy or practice that jails individuals based on their poverty.”
The suit, which they hope to have certified as a class action, names most major players in the city’s criminal justice system as defendants: the city itself, sheriff, commissioner of corrections, and five judges of the 22nd Judicial Circuit. The named plaintiffs are three black men and one white man, all currently being held by the city in the Workhouse because they could not afford to post cash bond. Included as co-counsel for the plaintiffs are the Advancement Project National Office, Civil Rights Corps, and Georgetown Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection.
Though the suit calls for the named plaintiffs’ immediate release on grounds that their detention is unconstitutional, it goes much further in asking the federal court to order St. Louis and the 22nd Judicial Circuit to disband their current policies and procedures and replace them with policies and procedures that follow the U.S. Constitution and reflect best practices in corrections. These procedures would include:
● providing notice to individuals arrested that their financial information will be collected
● determination of each individual’s ability to pay money bail and the amount they can afford
● giving individuals arrested an opportunity to be heard by a judge at the first opportunity concerning their ability to afford money bail and what nonmonetary release conditions, if any, are necessary
● giving each individual an opportunity in this hearing to present evidence, to make arguments concerning those issues, and to contest any evidence or argument offered by the government
● requiring the judge conducting this hearing to make substantive findings on the record about why an individual’s continued incarceration is warranted and why no less restrictive alternatives to detention address the state’s concerns
● and giving the individual free counsel at this hearing.
If the suit succeeds on these crucial points, these procedures would replace a current system, described by plaintiffs and their attorneys, where two very different systems of justice exist in St. Louis – one for those who can afford an attorney and bail, and another for those who cannot.
The current system described in detail condemns suspects to indefinite detention simply because they cannot post cash bail for an amount that was decided without consideration of their ability to pay or their risk to flee or any proof that their detention before trial protects the public’s safety. The commissioner of corrections and sheriff enforce the court’s detention orders, hence their inclusion in the suit.
At issue is the first hearing with a judge that detained individuals receive, which, according to the suit, is handled via television monitor with no court record and after a sheriff’s deputy has told the suspect not to speak to the judge. If addressed in this initial hearing, according to the suit, the judge says he or she will wait until the suspect has an attorney before hearing any complaints about detention – which alone guarantees weeks in jail without a real hearing.
“Indigent individuals are therefore denied any opportunity to challenge or request modification of their release conditions until a public defender enters on their case. This process takes an average of four weeks from the time of arrest due to the chronic underfunding of the Missouri State Public Defender system. Even after a public defender enters as counsel and files a motion to reduce bond, at least a week elapses before a judge hears the motion,” the suit states.
“Thus, indigent defendants remain incarcerated on average four to five weeks before they are given any opportunity to challenge or modify the release conditions set in their case. Poor individuals who do not qualify for a public defender, but also cannot afford to hire a private attorney, may face even longer delays waiting for a court determination that they are eligible for services by a public defender.”
The constitutional violation becomes evident in the comparison: “Conversely,” the suit claims, “wealthier individuals can either immediately pay the set monetary amount or hire an attorney to quickly challenge their release conditions.”
The four weeks (on average) it takes to be appointed a public defender and be in a position to file complaints about conditions of detention will spiral into nearly a year of pre-trial detention, on average.
“A presumptively innocent person is caged in the Workhouse on average 291 days because they simply cannot afford bail,” said Blake Strode, executive director of ArchCity Defenders.
“This is time missed from work, school, family that is lost forever. The collateral consequences are devastating: loss of wages or the loss of one’s job altogether; the inability to care for loved ones and the possibility of children going into the foster care system; and the race disparity impacting our city’s black population is unforgivable. This is illegal, unjust and the city – and the nation – needs to be put on notice that lives are at stake.”
The City of St. Louis did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson for Sheriff Vernon Betts said the sheriff had not yet been served on the case. Thom Gross, Public Information officer for the 22nd Judicial Circuit of Missouri, stated, “The 22nd Judicial Circuit has been compliant with all applicable Missouri statutes in the setting of pretrial release conditions, including bail bonds, and we would welcome a federal review of the constitutionality of those statutes and practices.”
Read the full complaint at https://tinyurl.com/ArchCity-class-action.
