A judge has gutted a lawsuit filed by several cities, including Santa Monica, targeting recently established bail rules that eliminated cash bail for most suspects, but the ruling allows plaintiffs to amend and resubmit the lawsuit.
A group of cities had argued that the new rules amounted to a violation of the court’s responsibility to uphold public safety under the California Constitution, but Orange County Superior Court Judge William D. Claster rejected that argument saying there was no constitutional requirement to use cash bail. Claster also rejected a request to suspend the new bail rules saying the Los Angeles courts were required to implement an alternative to cash bail in an earlier case.
However, he did allow the cities to file an amended lawsuit taking his recent ruling into account.
David W. Slayton, Executive Officer/Clerk of the Los Angeles Superior Court said the new system was a more fair way to handle justice.
He said the Los Angeles Superior Court’s Pre-Arraignment Release Protocols, also referred to as PARPs, provide for a pretrial release system in which the decision to release arrestees charged with non-violent, non-serious criminal offenses from jail prior to conviction is no longer determined by a person’s access to money. Instead, their release status is determined by risk to public or victim safety and their likelihood of returning to court.
Police officers now choose between cite and release, book and release, or magistrate review for suspects, with pre-arraignment release not applicable to serious crimes like murder.
Slayton said this is consistent with the constitutional purpose of bail, which is to ensure an arrestee appears for all court appearances and to reduce the risk to public and victim safety.
He said there is evidence the new system works and that the courts continue to work with stakeholders to improve the process.
"Under the previous money bail system, a high-risk arrestee could purchase their freedom, while a low-risk arrestee without similar financial resources would remain in jail," he said in a statement. "As a reminder, the traditional money bail system, which does not consider an individual’s risk to public and victim safety and likelihood of returning to court, still applies to serious and violent felonies such as murder, rape and robbery."
A group of cities including Arcadia, Industry, Rosemead, Artesia, Irwindale, San Dimas, Azusa, La Mirada, Santa Clarita, Baldwin Park, Lakewood, Santa Fe Springs, Beverly Hills, Lancaster, Santa Monica, Cerritos, La Verne, Torrance, City Covina, Manhattan Beach, Vernon, Downey, Norwalk, West Covina, Duarte, Palmdale, Whittier, Glendora and Paramount filed the lawsuit. The group issued a statement under their banner of the Coalition of Cities to End No-Cash Bail following the ruling saying they would submit new documents by a January deadline.
"We appreciate the court’s decision to allow us to present additional evidence of the harmful impacts of No-Cash Bail. This sweeping program was implemented too quickly without adequate research, or enough input from the communities it affects," said the statement. "We believe we can do better. As our coalition prepares additional data for the court, City leaders will continue to prioritize public safety in advocating for smart reforms to the justice system. We look forward to continuing our work with the courts and our local communities to find safe and positive outcomes for all residents of L.A. County."
Santa Monica councilmembers voted 4-3 to join the suit shortly after it was filed.
The vote split along narrow lines, with Mayor Pro Tempore Lana Negrete, Christine Parra, and Oscar de la Torre in favor, along with Phil Brock. Mayor Gleam Davis, Caroline Torosis, and Jesse Zwick opposed joining the lawsuit. Davis and Torosis emphasized concerns that the lawsuit might revert to the previous system without enhancing public safety. Brock argued for a more comprehensive plan, expressing frustration over the lack of opportunities for arrested individuals to reconsider life choices.
The plaintiffs have until January 31, 2024 to refile their case.
