SCOTUS Cert Denial Lets Cash Bail Stand
“The bail industry hasn't any cause to celebrate. It's an outmoded and destructive industry that's on its way to extinction, and cases like Walker are just the first step,” Southern Center for Human Rights Managing Attorney Sarah Geraghty said Tuesday.
April 02, 2019 at 02:57 PM
5 minute read
Surety bond insurance companies are applauding a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court Monday not to review the constitutionality of cash bail in a closely watched case from the North Georgia city of Calhoun, while civil rights lawyers say the closely watched litigation has still helped move the country away from an unfair system.
The high court denied certiorari in Walker v. Calhoun, effectively letting stand a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Atlanta affirming the constitutionality of Calhoun's monetary bail schedule. The circuit's split decision vacated a preliminary injunction granted by Senior Judge Harold Murphy of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, who has twice ruled that Calhoun's misdemeanor bail policy is unconstitutional for allowing those with cash to bail out of jail while holding those who can't afford release.
The Supreme Court's certiorari denial drew immediate cheers from the American Bail Coalition, a group that says it is “comprised of the nation's largest surety insurance companies” and “dedicated to protecting the Constitutional right to bail and the promotion, protection and advancement of the surety bail profession in the United States.”
“The Supreme Court today sent a very strong message that monetary bail and bail schedules are constitutional if the proper due process procedures are followed,” American Bail Coalition Executive Director Jeff Clayton said in the news release. “It has a been a long, hard and expensive road to get here.”
The group said that, in denying cert, the Supreme Court has affirmed that “rational basis review is the appropriate standard for reviewing claims of wealth-based discrimination under the equal protection clause,” contrary to two federal district judge rulings.
“Then-U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder first filed a statement of interest in Varden v. City of Clanton in 2015, arguing against the use of bail schedules,” Clayton said. “Since that time, we have been waiting for a signal from the U.S. Supreme Court as to whether the use of money bail schedules is constitutional. Today, we can say without hesitation, we know their answer.”
The Southern Center for Human Rights in Atlanta argued against cash bail on Maurice Walker's behalf.
“The bail industry hasn't any cause to celebrate. It's an outmoded and destructive industry that's on its way to extinction, and cases like Walker are just the first step,” Southern Center Managing Attorney Sarah Geraghty said Tuesday. “While we hoped for a different result in the Supreme Court, the Walker case has nevertheless pushed the cash bail debate forward and encouraged many jurisdictions—including Atlanta—to reconsider their reliance on wealth-based detention.”
During the course of the litigation, the city of Calhoun changed its system from one that allowed people without funds to be held up to 11 days before seeing a judge to a limit of 48 hours. Walker had been jailed for six days because he couldn't pay a preset bail of $160 after being charged as a pedestrian under the influence of alcohol.
“Under the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Walker (2018), cities that jail people for longer than 48 hours before conducting an inquiry into the ability to pay cash bail are now vulnerable to legal challenge and should change their policies,” Geraghty said. “A better, more morally defensible response would be to follow the lead of cities like Atlanta, Chicago, New Orleans, and Nashville in reducing or eliminating wealth-based detention all together.”
When the case returns to the trial court, the Walker legal team will seek to enforce at least the 48-hour limit on how long people can be jailed before seeing a judge. “Mr. Walker will ask the federal court to enjoin the city from going back to its prelitigation policy of jailing indigent people for a week or more before they get a bail hearing in a misdemeanor case,” Geraghty said.
The team representing the city of Calhoun includes J. Anderson Davis, Frank Beacham and Sam Lucas of Brinson, Askew, Berry, Seigler, Richardson & Davis in Rome, as well as David Root and Abby Grozine from Carlock, Copeland & Stair in Atlanta, working with city attorney George Govignon. Lucas argued the case at the Eleventh Circuit, twice.
“We are pleased that the Supreme Court declined to hear this case at this juncture,” Davis said Tuesday. “As we argued to the Court, the Eleventh Circuit correctly held that the City of Calhoun's Municipal Court's November 23, 2015, Standing Bail Order is constitutional. And now, over three years later and after two trips to the Eleventh Circuit, the Municipal Court can operate under the Standing Bail Order with the approval of the Eleventh Circuit.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllInsurer Not Required to Cover $29M Wrongful Death Judgment, Appeals Court Rules
Trying to Reason With Hurricane Season: Mediating First Party Property Insurance Claims
'I Thank You': Attorney Leverages Daily Report Article to Turn $42K Offer Into $600K Settlement
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Special Series Part 5: The State’s Bond Lock Impermissibly Delegates Legislative Authority
- 2President-Elect Donald Trump Sentenced to Unconditional Discharge
- 3JCPenney Customer's Slip-and-Fall From Bodily Substance Suit Best Left for a Jury to Decide, Judge Rules
- 4Products Liability: The Absence of Other Similar Claims—a Defense or a Misleading Effort to Sway a Jury?
- 5529 Accounts Are Not Your Divorce Piggybank
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250