Reviewing Pierce v. City of Velda City
Groups like Equal Justice Under Law would have you believe that bail reform is occurring all over the country. Bail, according to their reports, is the root of all problems with our criminal justice system and should be eliminated. They claim that they have succeeded in numerous cases eliminating bail. The problem is that these bail reform “success” cases are rarely what they appear. With just a brief reading of the cases, you realize that the reform discussed in the cases have to do with ensuring that laws are properly followed, not eliminating bail completely.
Pierce v. City of Velda City, Case No. 4:15-cv-00570-HEA (D.Ct. E.D.Mo.) is one of these cases. It is a class action suit brought on behalf of Donya Pierce by Equal Justice Under Law. Ms. Pierce was arrested on four counts including driving with a suspended license, failing to produce a license, driving without proof of insurance and driving with a broken headlight. She was required to post $800 bail to be released from jail. In review of the case, an officer removed a charge lowering her bail requirement to $650. Ms. Pierce was unable to post the required bond and remained in jail until her first appearance or within three days. Velda City, Missouri, at the time of Ms. Pierce’s arrest, only held court twice per week and did not allow arrestees to use commercial bail bonds. The city required defendants to post the entire bail amount to be released from jail. The City of Velda City, at the time when Ms. Pierce was arrested, did not alter from the fixed bail scheduled which was between $150 and $350 depending on the charge and did not allow for defendants to be released on their own recognizance.
The court considered the following question of law:
“Whether a “bail schedule” setting standard amounts of cash required up front to avoid post-arrest detention violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process and equal protection clauses.”
The case did not consider whether bail itself was constitutional (since that was long ago decided) and did not consider whether bail in any way violated the Fourteenth Amendment. It solely looked at whether the practices of the City of Velda City in using a fixed bail schedule that did not deviate despite mitigating circumstances, was required to be posted up front, and failed to allow for a review hearing within 48 hours violated the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
While the case is ongoing, the court issued an order resulting from a settlement agreement by the parties. The order required the City of Velda City to modify their arrest and release policies to comply with long standing rules of court. The fixed bail schedule used in the City of Velda City was unyielding and did not take into consideration anything besides the offense. It was not bail itself that was “reformed” but rather the city’s application of a fixed bail schedule that failed to comply with the law.