Cook County officials say they will proceed with the elimination of cash bail on Jan. 1 after a ruling by a circuit court judge in Kankakee County held that portions of the controversial SAFE-T Act were unconstitutional.
According to a press release, the ruling only impacts counties that had signed onto the suit, and therefore Cook County prosecutors will proceed with the implementation of the Pretrial Fairness Act’s changes to the detention system.
“The historic reforms in the Pretrial Fairness Act represent an important step toward improving community safety, addressing decades of harm to Black and Brown communities, guaranteeing equal justice for all under the law – not only for those who can afford to pay,” officials said in a statement.
The Cook County Office of the President, the office of the Cook County Public Defender, the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County and the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office issued the joint statement Thursday saying that they would proceed with the elimination of cash bail.
The ruling only impacted the implementation of bail reform statewide, allowing other elements to remain in place.
A total of 65 counties signed onto the suit, which was filed in Kankakee County. On Thursday, a judge ruled that the elimination of cash bail was unconstitutional, finding that the Pretrial Fairness Act violated Article 1, Section 9 of the state’s constitution, which lays out the implementation of cash bail in the state.
As a result, the judge held that the law would instead need to be passed via constitutional amendment, which would require it to go before Illinois voters.
Local
Attorney General Kwame Raoul has said that the state will appeal the ruling to the state’s Supreme Court. It is unclear when the hearing will take place, but it likely will not take place prior to the effective date of the no-bail provisions in the law that were set to take effect Sunday.
The Pretrial Fairness Act discards cash bail in the state, and instead allows a judge to determine whether a person accused of a serious crime should be detained prior to trial based on any potential threat to public safety, or any threat that the individual may flee if released prior to their case being heard.
Feeling out of the loop? We'll catch you up on the Chicago news you need to know. Sign up for the weekly Chicago Catch-Up newsletter.
A series of state’s attorneys around Illinois filed suit against the measure, arguing that it violated the state’s constitution, the Victims Rights Act, and the separation of powers clause.
Officials in Cook County disputed that the bill had been rushed through, saying that it prioritized fairness and public safety.
“The SAFE-T Act and the Pretrial Fairness Act were thoroughly drafted to prioritize safety for victims, accused people and entire communities,” officials said.