Discussion on Trump’s Cashless Bail Executive Order
Brett Tolman, a former U.S. attorney from Utah and chair of law and justice at the First Policy Institute, shared insights on President Donald Trump’s recent executive order concerning cashless bail in an exclusive conversation. In his discussion with Breitbart News Daily, he elaborated on the complexities of the legal system and the implications of various policies for state and local jurisdictions.
The topic emerged as Trump is expected to sign an executive order that would prompt federal agencies to examine jurisdictions that have implemented cashless bail systems. This comes amidst reports of a tragic incident where a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee was fatally stabbed at a station in North Carolina.
Tolman explained the role of bail in the U.S. legal framework, stating, “Individuals can be arrested, charged with a crime, taken before a judge, and, in most cases, bail is set… it ensures that people show up for all hearings.”
The concept of cashless bail was initially designed to assist low-level, non-violent offenders who struggle with financial constraints. Tolman pointed out, “It was created to prevent punishing people simply for being poor, but what’s happened is that it’s being misused.” He mentioned specific instances in cities where such practices are now considered risky.
He also contrasted state systems with the federal model, noting that the latter has largely done away with traditional bail. In the federal system, judges decide on pretrial detention based on whether an individual poses a risk of flight or danger. “They really don’t have bail in the traditional sense. Instead, individuals are assessed on their potential threat to society or themselves when they appear before a judge.”
In his remarks, Tolman cited Texas as a case in point for reform. The state has revised its constitution so that courts can deny bail if the defendant is regarded as a danger. “If someone knows they are dangerous and continue to harm others, judges now have the authority to keep them detained until their trial,” he noted.
He emphasized the crucial role of prosecutors in determining bail outcomes. “Over recent years, we’ve observed an alarming trend of prosecutors indicating they won’t pursue certain crimes… this endangers the community,” he explained, suggesting that the decisions made by prosecutors heavily influence judges during the information review hearings.
Trump’s executive order mandates federal agencies to compile a list of jurisdictions that have either implemented or misused cashless bail systems, aligning these findings with federal funds, grants, and contracts. Tolman pointed out, “While he can’t directly compel governors and prosecutors, he has a significant influence. By threatening to freeze the funds they rely on, he can grab their attention.”
He further argued that withholding federal funds could push city officials, particularly in areas grappling with rising crime, to reconsider their bail policies. “If federal funding is cut, changes will need to be made to prevent ongoing violence by keeping dangerous individuals off the streets,” Tolman remarked, predicting that leaders in cities like Chicago and Los Angeles may feel pressured to adjust their strategies to protect their resources.
When discussing long-term solutions, Tolman stressed the need for greater accountability. “Prosecutors should be required to provide judges with evidence concerning the threat levels of individuals… Without that, they will face backlash. We need to counteract the influence of those lenient prosecutors,” he suggested.
