In 2019, New York State adopted bail reform laws aimed at addressing inequalities in the criminal justice system, which some believed the previous bail laws have caused over the years. The legal framework of these bail laws focused on reforming the traditional cash bail system.

Under the new laws, judges are now prohibited from setting cash bail for most misdemeanor and nonviolent felony offenses. Instead of pretrial detention, individuals charged with these offenses are released on their own recognizance. This means they are allowed to go free without having to pay bail, as long as they promise to return for their court dates.

For cases involving certain violent felonies, judges are still allowed to set bail. However, the guidelines have become stricter, requiring a higher burden of proof to support the imposition of bail. Recently New York has seen a rise in crime, most notably violent crime by repeat offenders, that have brought these laws back into the spotlight in 2024.

The reform laws also promote the use of alternative forms of pretrial supervision, such as electronic monitoring or check-ins with a pretrial services agency, as alternatives to detention.

The aim of these changes is to reduce the number of individuals held in jail pending trial, particularly those who cannot afford to pay a money bail. The laws aim to address the disproportionate impact that cash bail has on low-income individuals and communities of color, ensuring that pretrial detention is based on the individual's risk to public safety rather than their ability to pay. But whether or not it has achieved these aims is something that is now being seriously weighed against drawbacks that appear to be manifesting recently.

How is This Different From Previous Policies?

The 2019 New York bail reform laws significantly differ from the legal framework that existed before their implementation. These reforms aim to address the issue of pretrial detention and inequality within the criminal justice system.

Prior to the current bail reform legislation, the use of cash bail was common, whereby individuals accused of a crime were required to pay a sum of money as collateral to secure their release before trial. This system was argued to have disproportionately affected low-income individuals and communities of color, as they often could not afford to pay bail and thus remained incarcerated.

In contrast, the new laws are meant to minimize this reliance on cash bail, shifting towards alternative methods such as release on recognizance or imposing non-monetary conditions for release. This new bail reform framework was proposed as a set of real solutions to real problems of public inequity.

Instead of the ability to remand arrestees to custody based on prior criminal actions and potential danger to the community, judges were now only able to do so if they believed someone to be a flight risk. The new laws bring about a significant change by mandating judges to consider these specific factors when determining whether they are able to detain someone before trial. The reforms also supposedly empower judges to utilize non-monetary conditions such as electronic monitoring or mandatory check-ins as alternatives to pretrial detention.

Furthermore, the new bail reform laws significantly limit the offenses for which cash bail can be set, which is meant to reduce pretrial incarceration for non-violent offenses and ensuring that individuals are not incarcerated solely due to their inability to pay bail.

Put simply, the 2019 New York bail reform laws mark a fundamental departure from the previous policies.

Why did New York Adopt the 2019 Bail Reform Laws?

In recent years, it has been hard to ignore the growing public outcry regarding what has been characterized as an inequitable nature of the bail system in the United States. The case of Kalief Browder, a young man who spent three years in pretrial detention at Rikers Island for an alleged theft, only to have the charges dropped, had been repeatedly put forward as a catalyst for reform.

His tragic story highlighted the potential flaws of a system that disproportionately affects low-income individuals who cannot afford to pay bail, and the emotional nature of that situation put significant weight behind the movement, especially after his death by suicide in 2015.

In response to mounting pressure and calls for change, New York State decided to address this issue head-on and enacted the 2019 Bail Reform Laws. The process leading to the popular support and eventual implementation of these laws was multifaceted and involved several key events.

First, grassroots organizations and advocates for criminal justice reform tirelessly campaigned for change, drawing attention to the inherent unfairness of the bail system. In addition, extensive media coverage of cases such as Browder's raised public awareness and fostered support for reform.

Further momentum was gained when progressive lawmakers incorporated bail reform into their platforms and ran on promises of addressing the flaws in the criminal justice system. After the 2018 midterm elections, the new Democratic majority in the New York State Legislature made criminal justice reform a top priority, seizing the opportunity to pass sweeping changes.

Finally, in April 2019, the 2019 Bail Reform Laws were signed into law by Governor Andrew Cuomo.

How has this Affected Overall Crime in New York?

Since the implementation of New York's 2019 bail reform laws, there have been notable changes in the amount and type of criminal activity in the state. These reforms were intended to address issues related to the pretrial detention system, and aimed at reducing unnecessary incarceration for individuals awaiting trial.

One significant change observed after the implementation of the bail reform laws is a decrease in the overall crime rate. As individuals charged with non-violent offenses were no longer held in custody simply due to an inability to pay bail, the number of individuals incarcerated for low-level crimes has significantly declined. This shift has resulted in a decrease in the reported instances of non-violent offenses across the state.

However, it is important to note that there has been an increase in certain types of criminal activity. Critics argue that the bail reform laws have inadvertently led to a rise in certain offenses, such as property crimes and some drug-related offenses, as well as an overall increase in violent crime, both reported and unreported.

I've Heard About this in The News, Do I Need to Be Concerned?

As a resident of New York, it's totally normal if you're concerned about the impact of recent bail reform laws, and whether they potentially pose risks to our daily lives, especially after recent events you may have heard about. While the average person may not immediately need to worry about becoming a victim of crime, it is important to acknowledge that current trends do indicate what could be perceived as an increase in danger.

It is crucial to remember that this analysis does not aim to state that every New Yorker needs to be immediately concerned about their safety. Rather, it seeks to highlight the reality that there may be a degree of additional risk present in our daily lives, and that these risks may have arisen due to various factors such as the changing landscape of criminal justice and the impact of bail reform laws.

Also, understanding the intricacies of liability and how these changes in our environment may affect the people who have a duty to provide a safe environment for the public is something worth considering. More overall danger means more situations where negligent security or premises liability may attach to a situation.

But these current events are not a reason to panic. Following the coverage of these news stories and staying informed are going to help all of us stay on top of where this subject is going.

Why is There so Much Controversy Over the 2019 New York Bail Reform Laws?

In recent times, the 2019 New York bail reform laws have faced significant criticism due to specific events that have unfolded in the state. Several factors have led to this controversy.

One key issue relates to the handling of repeat offenders. Critics argue that under the new legislation, individuals arrested for multiple offenses can be released without bail, potentially posing a risk to public safety. They highlight instances where individuals who had been released were arrested again shortly after for committing similar crimes. Such incidents have fueled concerns that the bail reform laws may be failing to adequately address the safety of the community.

Another point of contention revolves around the inclusion of certain charges in the list of offenses where judges are mandated to release defendants without bail. Critics argue that offenses such as robbery and burglary, which involve the violation of personal property rights, should not be automatically exempted from bail, as the potential for repeat offenses is high.

Furthermore, opponents of the bail reform laws argue that the implementation lacked foresight and proper planning. They claim that the sudden change in policy failed to address potential loopholes and consequences, leading to unintended negative outcomes.

We are bringing this topic to your attention and informing you of the bail reform in light of the recent death of Detective Jonathan Diller. Our thoughts and condolences are with him and his family as what can only be described as an absolute tragedy.