Certain states, including Arizona, have begun scrapping court costs and fees for people unable to pay – two experts on legal punishments explain why

Alexes Harris, University of Washington, and Alex R. Piquero, University of Miami

In today’s American criminal legal system, courts impose fines and fees as a means to punish people and hold them accountable for legal violations.

conversation arizona

Several U.S. states are eliminating criminal fines and fees for people who can’t afford them.
Getty Images

At times, people are sentenced to pay without incarceration, but frequently, people across the U.S. are sentenced to both jail time and fiscal penalties. Those costs are assessed by individual courts and include processing and filing charges, jury fees, and fiscal penalties such as interest charges and late penalty fees. The collected money is then used to pay for costs such as the administration of court-appointed attorneys, probation, detention, and diversion programs.

But these fines and fees are often levied without any consideration for an individual’s ability to pay – and can add up to thousands of dollars. Given the potential consequences of legal debt on people unable to pay, including the loss of the right to vote and further criminal infractions, we conducted a multistate study on the impact of fines and fees.

What we found is that these types of sanctions do not improve public safety or serve as an effective deterrent in reducing further crime. More troubling is that the negative consequences of fines and fees are disproportionately felt by people of color and those who are poor.

Because of these potential financial hardships and adverse effects, U.S. lawmakers have begun to limit the types and amounts of fines and fees that can be charged.

What the research shows

In our study of eight states – California, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Washington, Georgia, Missouri, and Texas – we found extreme variations in how court-imposed fines and fees were used.

Some states had statutes mandating a minimum amount of fines and fees to be imposed on people for specific crimes and infractions; other states did not. Some local judges sentenced people unable to pay to jail as a violation of their sentence; other judges in different counties within the same state did not. To collect outstanding debts, some states even sued formerly incarcerated people for the cost of their room and board; other states did not.

In Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, for instance, our research there showed that financial burden increased the chances among juvenile offenders to commit additional crimes within two years of their initial arrests.

In another statewide study in Florida, we found that fees increased recidivism and, in particular, that Black youth with restitution fees had a higher recidivism likelihood. Our study further found that Black and Hispanic youth tended to receive higher fees compared to white youth regardless of the alleged crimes. The average fees for Black juveniles were US$709.50 and $633.30 for Hispanic youths. In stark contrast, the average fee for white juveniles was $426.50.

A wealth of research has illustrated how unpaid court fines and fees force people to make decisions regarding housing, medical care, education, and even food and medication.

In an April 23, 2023, letter, the U.S. Department of Justice warned court officials and state agencies that imposing fines and fees on offenders who cannot pay may result in them losing their jobs, driver’s license, right to vote, or even their home.

Changes across the country

Depending on the crime, Arizona juveniles and their parents faced a slew of costs, including probation supervision fees, family counseling services, drug and alcohol screenings and even a $25 administrative fee for court-appointed attorneys.

But a new law says they don’t have to pay any of those anymore.

Though the law does not put an end to fines relating to restitution charges or driving under the influence of alcohol charges, it does eliminate all fees assessed by a juvenile court — for court-appointed attorneys, probation, detention and diversion programs.

A white woman stands in front of an American flag as she delivers a speech.
Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs has eliminated various fines and fees for juvenile offenders. Rebecca Noble/Getty Images

Arizona was not alone. Indiana, Illinois, Montana, California, Louisiana, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia have also enacted similar laws that eliminate or reduce juvenile fines and fees.

As these states have learned, monetary sanctions do far more harm than good and inflict disproportionate hardship on those least able to pay them.

“These fees put unnecessary financial stress on children and their families when they should be focused on rehabilitation,” Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs said in October 2023. “They hold individuals back at a time in their life when what they really need is help moving forward.”

Alexes Harris, Professor of Sociology, University of Washington, and Alex R. Piquero, Professor of Sociology & Criminology and Arts & Sciences Distinguished Scholar, University of Miami

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

+ posts

The Conversation is a nonprofit, independent news organization dedicated to unlocking the knowledge of experts for the public good. We publish trustworthy and informative articles written by academic experts for the general public and edited by our team of journalists.

At TheConversation.com (and through distribution of our articles to thousands of news outlets worldwide), you’ll find explanatory journalism on the events, discoveries and issues that matter today. Our articles share researchers’ expertise in policy, science, health, economics, education, history, ethics and most every subject studied in colleges and universities. Some articles offer practical advice grounded in research, while others simply provide authoritative answers to questions that sparked our curiosity.

The Conversation U.S. is part of a global group of news organizations founded in Australia in 2011 by Andrew Jaspan, a former newspaper editor who wanted to encourage academics to engage with the public, and Jack Rejtman. Jaspan led the U.S. launch in October 2014. Our main newsroom is in Boston, with editors working remotely in cities across the country.

There are also editions in Africa, Australia, Canada, France, Indonesia, New Zealand, Spain and the United Kingdom.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x