Se habla Español | Wir sprechen Deutsch | Mówimy po polsku
Spanish Translation German Translation Polish Translation
Contact us for your initial consultation
847.577.8700
posted on 2/19/23

We at Glasgow & Olsson have been covering the recent news and progressions on the issue of the SAFE-T Act’s constitutionality.

As part of its effort to overturn a judge’s ruling that part of the controversial SAFE-T Act was unconstitutional, the Illinois Attorney General’s office filed its opening argument with the state’s highest court on Jan 26, 2023.

Illinois would have emerged as one of the nation’s first states to do away with cash bail thanks to the landmark criminal justice bill, which included the elimination of cash bail in the state as one of its goals.

Kankakee County Chief Judge Thomas Cunnington’s ruling in support of a group of prosecutors’ and sheriffs’ offices in opposition to the bail reform law halted the imposition of the law at the last minute after it was set to go into effect in January of this year.

In an effort to challenge the Pretrial Fairness Act, attorneys for the prosecutors and sheriffs filed 64 nearly identical lawsuits, but some were consolidated into one case before the Kankakee County Chief Judge, who presided over the hearing.

In the Kankakee case, the Court ruled that part of the law violated a requirement that defendants be bailable “by sufficient sureties” under the state constitution, except for certain offenses in which bail is not required. Additionally, the Court concluded that it violated the separation of powers that exists between the judiciary and the legislature.

In the ruling, the Court wrote that “the appropriateness of bail is a matter for the court and not something that can be decided by legislative fiat.”

In an application filed on Thursday, the office of Attorney General Kwame Raoul argued that the Court’s decision had “flaws,” that the state constitution did not require Illinois to maintain a monetary bail system, and as a result, the Court’s decision was flawed.

According to the Attorney General’s office, the state’s constitutional language on bail has been drafted in order to ensure that a defendant who is presumed innocent can seek pretrial release while their case is still pending to protect their rights.

In addition to citing dictionary definitions of bail, Raoul’s office also cited past editions of dictionaries from before the United States became a country that never associated bail with having to put down a cash deposit to be released on bail.

Certain conditions have historically been imposed on defendants who are released before trial or who are ‘bailed’ to assure their appearance at trial. However, at issue in this hearing are what acceptable and constitutional terms of that pretrial release might be.

There is significant case law stating that the legislature is entitled to set policy and that the Court’s reasoning is flawed in its argument that the act violates the separation of powers.

The opponents of the act are required to file their response by the 17th of February, and oral arguments will be held after that.

Contact an Experienced Lawyer Today

It is important to get professional help in matters involving your personal freedom. Glasgow & Olsson is uniquely qualified to help navigate new changes to pretrial release procedures. Recent changes to Illinois law likely affect your rights and trial process, so make sure to remain informed and updated. When you need an attorney, experience matters. Contact us today to learn how our experience can get you the results you deserve.