Illinois Supreme Court to rule on SAFE-T Act regarding cash bail elimination

CHICAGO - Back in December, Governor J.B. Pritzker signed the amended version of the criminal justice reform law known as the "SAFE-T Act" into law.

Now, eight months later, we’re expecting a ruling from the Illinois Supreme Court on the law’s constitutionality sometime Tuesday morning.

Should the high court decide the law can indeed move forward, some have argued that allowing defendants who are awaiting trial to remain free from jail will lead to rising crime rates.

FOX 32 Legal Analyst Karen Conti says that narrative doesn’t hold up under scrutiny.

"Studies here all show that when they have eliminated cash bail or really diminished it, the recidivism rate is not any higher," Conti said. "The crime rates are not any higher, so I don't think this is going to be releasing dangerous people into our universe."

SUBSCRIBE TO FOX 32 CHICAGO ON YOUTUBE

At issue for the justices is whether lawmakers in Springfield overstepped their authority when they took away a judge’s pre-trial decision on whether a defendant should be forced to pay a cash bond to guarantee a return to court.

Conti believes that when it comes to keeping people safe from potentially dangerous people, the SAFE-T Act is clear.

"The judges here still have the ability to detain the accused. If the person has a violent history or is a danger or is a threat of fleeing, the judge can absolutely detain a person, so this is not getting away with cash bail for everybody," Conti said.

However, Conti suggested that after all this time of waiting for an answer, we may not get a decision on the constitutionality of the SAFE-T Act. She says given how long we've been waiting, it's entirely possible that there are problems with the challenge itself.

"The court could conceivably not rule on the merits of this and instead could rule that the sheriffs and the state's attorneys who were challenging this act don't have standing to bring this lawsuit, meaning they don't have a dog in the fight and the court could say that they're not going to rule on the merits, and they're going to kick this can down the road until a real plaintiff comes in with a real complaint," Conti said.