Since the Ferguson movement began in 2014, protestors have picketed St. Louis’ municipal courts with signs like, “Stop debtors prison” and even “Abolish muni courts.” Big-name law firms have teamed up with local attorneys from ArchCity Defenders and Saint Louis University School of Law Legal Clinics to sue St. Louis County municipal courts for violating the rights of the poor.
Many people have been working together to shine a light on the disparities and racial injustice within the municipal court system. And they had hoped that the Missouri Supreme Court would step in and do the one thing that could possibly bring order to the 80 municipal courts within St. Louis County – consolidate them.
On September 20, the state’s Supreme Court released a 16-page order on “Minimum operating standards for Missouri courts.” Some advocates said their immediate response was some cuss words and a sense of “defeat.”
“There’s really nothing all that’s ‘new’ in the ‘new’ Municipal Court Standards,” said Mae Quinn, director of the MacArthur Justice Center in St. Louis. “They reflect an all-too-familiar failure to call out institutional actors who disregard rights of certain community members, continuation of a convoluted body of law that confuses litigants more than protects them, and a sense that coming close to constitutional is good enough when it comes to the primarily poor persons of color who are shuttled through Missouri’s countless lower courts on a daily basis.”
Most of the 10 “new” standards already exist in state laws or court operating rules. The problem is supervision, particularly within the county’s 80 municipal courts.
“When you have a broken system, you can continue to implement rules,” said Dave Leipholtz, director of community-based studies at Better Together St. Louis. “But we have no way to enforce them. It’s the same actors, the same structure and oversight. Changing the rules doesn’t get to the issue of accountability.”
The “new” standards also don’t touch on penalties for courts that don’t obey, he said, as many courts have been doing for decades without penalty.
Patricia Breckenridge, chief justice of the Missouri Supreme Court, spoke about the new standards at the joint annual meeting of The Missouri Bar and the Judicial Conference of Missouri on September 22 in Lake Ozark, after describing her visits to municipal courts where she saw much malpractice.
“Was it disheartening to see that there are still courts operating contrary to the law? Absolutely,” Breckenridge said. However, she said she believes that there have been positive changes in the municipal divisions, and the mandatory standards “make clear how municipal divisions must operate.”
She recognized that supervision poses a “special challenge” in woefully fragmented St. Louis County, and committed to hiring two municipal court monitors to assist the presiding judge in the county.
She noted that nine municipalities in North St. Louis County are currently consolidating their municipal divisions. The Missouri Court Automation Committee and state courts administrator’s office are helping to facilitate this consolidation.
Debtor’s prisons stay intact
Many have been criticizing the county’s municipal court system for creating a modern-day debtors prisons (a historical reference to 19th-century prisons for the poor who couldn’t pay debt.) One of these protestors is North County resident Autumn Mae. At 17, Chesterfield police threw her in an adult jail for five days because she didn’t have car insurance, she said. Her parents didn’t know where she was for the first 24 hours because she was not allowed to call them. She had to stay in jail because her family struggled to find the money to get her out.
“There are people doing serious crimes out there,” she said. “How can you jail people for just traffic tickets?”
It appears that the Supreme Court took steps to make sure that people like Mae don’t have to spend an indefinite amount of time in jail. The order states, “No person is sentenced to confinement on ‘minor traffic violations’ or ‘municipal ordinance violations’ with the exception of violations: involving alcohol or controlled substances; endangering the health or welfare of others; or involving eluding or giving false information to a law enforcement officer.”
However, that still doesn’t take jail time off the table for minor infractions. Advocates have argued that if people fail to pay fines, they should face legal collection proceedings – not jail time. However, the standards state that judges can still confine defendants for up to 30 days for “contempt of court,” if the judges feel that those people have not done their best to pay the fines.
Quinn said that, if anything, the standards “provide further imprimatur for custodial arrests for mere ordinance allegations.” Under the Fourth Amendment, arrest is permitted in the United States upon probable cause that a crime has been committed.
“Yet, the Missouri Supreme Court’s new Municipal Court Standards would appear to ignore this fundamental tenet, allowing the ongoing problematic practice of warrantless civil arrest in Missouri,” Quinn said.
Sliding-scale fines
The ArchCity Defenders have been advocating for the courts to charge fines according to the defendants’ income levels – something the St. Louis city court implemented in December 2014. With the “bench warrant system,” poor residents are often caught in a black hole of court debt, said Thomas Harvey, executive director of the ArchCity Defenders. First, they get tickets for traffic or other minor infractions. Since they can’t pay them, they don’t go to court for fear of getting thrown in jail – subsequently getting warrants for failing to appear. Having warrants, they can’t get jobs, drivers’ licenses or sometimes aid from homeless shelters, he said.
“The fines should not be as high as they are, and they should be proportioned to income,” Harvey told The St. Louis American previously. “You wouldn’t have near as many problems as you have now.”
The standards seem to address this concern. Now the courts must ask the defendants about their financial condition and allow them to “present evidence” about their ability to pay fines before establishing payment requirements. Fines and costs assessed on traffic violations shall not exceed $225, and indigent defendants will not have to pay court costs. The courts also can’t tack on an additional charge for failure to appear for a minor traffic violation.
The standards say that the courts shall use alternative payment plans and community service options. These are all things that Ferguson protestors have pushed for.
Court-appointed representation
In regards to court-appointed counsel, the standards borrow from “outmoded language” in existing state standards, Quinn said.
Now judges must inform litigants of their right to request appointment of counsel, if the violation “could result in confinement.”
“But this statement – rooted in language of older United Supreme Court cases – does not embrace more modern constitutional requirements,” she said.
Quinn pointed to the 2002 case of Alabama v. Shelton, where the U.S. Supreme Court modified its prior rule that focused on the concept of “actual imprisonment.” Shelton held that even in cases where a suspended sentence is imposed, the right of counsel may be required.
Silence on minors
Quinn has long been fighting against the state’s practice of prosecuting high-school age children as adults. But the new standards don’t touch this topic, she said.
“In a series of cases dating back to 2005 the United States Supreme Court recognized that children under 18 are categorically less culpable than adults and must be treated differently in our courts,” she said.
“Instead it seems the Missouri Supreme Court is just fine with kids proceeding pro se in these institutions, entering guilty pleas without attorneys, being processed without heightened legal protections, and being paraded in front of the public courtroom without concern for their confidentiality.”
Overall, advocates feel that the standards won’t slow the continuous lawsuits – and enormous legal expenses – brought against the municipal courts. There is still no accountability.
“Sadly, it seems our Supreme Court has spent more time over the last two years appointing system insiders to fill seats on countless commissions than carefully listening to truly impacted persons, conferring with knowledgeable attorneys, demanding accountability from obviously bad actors, or digging into what really ails us as a region,” Quinn said.
“Fortunately, the Missouri Supreme Court does not provide the final word on such matters. Unfortunately, further costly federal lawsuits may have to be brought to ensure all Missouri courts ultimately comply with the Constitution.”
Clinkscale appointed to SAB
Darnetta Clinkscale, a former member of the elected board for the St. Louis Public Schools, was appointed by Mayor Francis Slay to the three-member appointed Special Administrative Board that has run the district since 2007. She replaces Melanie Adams, an original member of the SAB who resigned because she has accepted a job in Minneapolis. The other two SAB members remain Richard Gaines (also a former elected board member) and Rick Sullivan, SAB president.
Clinkscale has worked at Barnes-Jewish Hospital for more than 35 years. She received a B.A. in biological science from Southern Illinois University-Carbondale, is a graduate of the Northwestern University School of Respiratory Therapy, and has an MBA from Lindenwood College.
As St. Louis Public Radio noted, her appointment does not need confirmation to take effect. It comes as state education officials are discussing when an elected board may resume control over the city schools.
