Portside

A year ago, Illinois made headlines as the first state to eliminate cash bail. Like many, I feared such a sweeping change could compromise public safety. However, the anticipated chaos never materialized — crime rates have dropped. Now, fear should no longer prevent states from taking similar actions.

The Pretrial Fairness Act introduced a system that more accurately detains those with genuine risks while allowing low-risk individuals to await trial outside of jail. No cash is required. The goal was to create a system that better balances public safety, accountability and individual liberties.

The result? People can no longer buy their way out of pretrial detention. Release is a presumed right for non-violent defendants, maintained through their behavior — not their bank account. For violent offenders, detention without bail remains an option, keeping public safety at the forefront.

As a prosecutor, I frequently used bail to keep individuals in jail when I believed they posed a risk to public safety or were unlikely to appear in court. My high bail requests were generally reserved for violent offenders, repeat offenders — especially those with multiple domestic violence or intoxicated driving charges — or those with a history of missing court. While the cash bail system was intended to ensure accountability, over time, it became clear that bail amounts rarely influenced whether someone would re-offend or return to court. Nor was it the determining factor in who was detained or released.

Cash bail didn’t address the root causes of missed court hearings or re-offending. People dealing with mental health struggles, substance abuse, or transportation challenges weren’t deterred by a financial penalty. Some individuals were overwhelmed by the chaos in their lives, which affected their ability to stay on top of court dates. Are these valid excuses? Absolutely not. However, it became clear that offering practical assistance to help people navigate these challenges would lead to better accountability and public safety outcomes, rather than relying on financial penalties.

In fact, the financial incentive of bail is largely illusory. Most defendants work with bail bondsmen, paying a non-refundable fee to secure release without financial consequences if they fail to follow their release conditions. Meanwhile, wealthier individuals can always afford bail, regardless of the seriousness of their charges, underscoring the system’s inequity.

The effect of bail on low-level defendants is more widespread. Many spend days in jail simply because they cannot afford small bail amounts. They often plead guilty to minor offenses, accepting “time served” just to regain freedom, bu the damage is done by then. This may seem inconsequential. The results are severe: some lose their jobs for missing work, which can then spiral into housing instability or even losing custody of their children. Ironically, rather than preventing crime, the cash bail system often sets people on a path toward it. 

Research confirms that even a few days of pretrial detention increases the likelihood of future criminal behavior, not the other way around.

Illinois demonstrates that a cashless bail system, when implemented thoughtfully, more effectively determines who should be released or detained. Tools like court notifications and supportive services — such as connecting to resources and voluntary treatment — have proven more successful at ensuring people follow the law and show up for court. Now that we know better, we must do better.

The critical shift in Illinois’ system focuses on risk over riches. By assessing an individual’s likelihood to re-offend or skip court — rather than their capacity to pay bail — the state has moved toward a more capable and just approach to pretrial detention. This transition was not easy. It required extensive conversations between prosecutors, lawmakers, reform advocates, and key stakeholders. While not everyone agreed and adjustments have been made — and may still be needed — the early results are undeniably promising.

Given that research now supports the idea that no cash bail can lead to decreased crime and overcrowded jails, other states should consider prioritizing justice and public safety over tradition. Illinois offers a compelling example of what’s possible. 

Lisel Petis is a former prosecutor and a resident senior fellow for Criminal Justice and Civil Liberties at the R Street Institute. She wrote this for InsideSources.com.