Trump vows to bring back cash bail in Chicago
Why it matters: The elimination of cash bail in Illinois has been followed by a drop in crime and jail populations, according to recent data.
Catch up quick: The Illinois Pretrial Fairness Act, passed in 2021 as a provision of the state's SAFE-T Act, went into effect in September 2023.
It eliminates the practice of allowing a defendant to pay money/bail to leave jail while awaiting trial.
Instead, a judge determines who stays in jail based on factors like the seriousness of the crime and the defendant's likelihood of fleeing.
What they're saying:"The radical-left City Council adopted no cash bail," Trump said Monday, even though the law did not involve the City Council.
"By the way, every place in the country you have no cash bail is a disaster," Trump continued. "Somebody murders somebody and they're out on no cash bail before the day is out."
Reality check: Chicago crime has fallen by 15% since August 2023, the month before the law was implemented, according to recent police data.
Murder is down 37%, robbery is down 36%, and motor vehicle theft is down 44% compared with early August 2023.
The other side:"I think it's clear from the president's comments that he doesn't really understand the law itself or the impact it's having in Illinois," Ben Ruddell, director of criminal justice policy at the ACLU of Illinois, tells Axios.
Ruddell calls the prospect of Congress changing state law a "highly unusual idea" and chalks up Trump's statement to "the bluster of a president who blusters a lot about a lot of things."
Zoom out: Trump also threatened to intervene in law enforcement in Los Angeles, Baltimore, Oakland and New York.
Side dish: Trump commented on the possibility of Gov. JB Pritzker running for president in 2028, saying, "I notice he lost a little weight, so maybe he has a chance, you know?"
Pritzker shot back on X: "Donald, thanks for the compliment! Let's not lie to the public, you and I both know you have no authority to take over Chicago. By the way, where are the Epstein files?"
What's next: Trump suggested he might send the National Guard to Chicago, as he is doing in D.C.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
a minute ago
- New York Times
Central Park Group Wants Ban on Horse-Drawn Carriages
The nonprofit group that manages Central Park on Tuesday formally asked New York City officials to ban horse-drawn carriages from the park, for the first time taking a public stance on an issue that has been politically contentious for years. The group, the Central Park Conservancy, said it was throwing its support behind Ryder's Law, a pending City Council bill that would prohibit horse carriages from operating in the city, and urged Mayor Eric Adams and Adrienne Adams, the Council speaker, to support such a ban. Horse carriages have been a fixture of the Central Park landscape since the 19th century, and the conservancy's opposition to their continued operation in the park could be a significant blow to the industry. 'We do not take this position lightly,' Betsy Smith, the conservancy's president, wrote in a letter to the mayor and Council speaker, 'but with visitation to the park growing to record levels, we feel strongly that banning horse carriages has become a matter of public health and safety for park visitors.' Last week, a 15-year-old mare named Lady that had worked in New York City for less than two months collapsed and died at a Manhattan intersection. City health officials are investigating what caused the death. Animal rights activists have condemned the carriage trade as abusive, but Ms. Smith said in her letter that the conservancy's decision was unrelated to such criticisms. 'We are not experts on animal welfare and will leave those arguments to others,' she wrote, 'but we are experts on the park.' Instead, Ms. Smith said, the conservancy wants to protect the public and to prevent the physical damage that horse-drawn carriages do to the park's roadways. This is a developing story that will be updated.
Associated Press
a minute ago
- Associated Press
What to know about Trump's potential change in federal marijuana policy
President Donald Trump is taking a new look at reclassifying marijuana as a less dangerous drug in a move that could nudge the federal government closer to an approach already embraced in many states. Trump said Monday that he hopes to decide in the coming weeks about whether to support changes to the way marijuana is regulated. The renewed focus on marijuana comes more than a year after former President Joe Biden's administration formally proposed reclassifying marijuana. No decision was made before Biden left office. Meanwhile, many states have already gone further than the federal government by legalizing the recreational use of marijuana for adults or allowing it for medical purposes. What's the federal policy on marijuana? Possessing marijuana remains a federal crime punishable by fines and prison time. Selling or cultivating marijuana is a more serious offense, punishable by prison sentences of five years to life, depending on the quantity of the drug. The Justice Department last year proposed to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I drug, alongside heroin and LSD, to a less dangerous Schedule III substance, which includes such things as ketamine and some anabolic steroids. But that switch involved a lengthy bureaucratic process. Nearly 43,000 public comments were submitted to the federal government about the proposed change. The Drug Enforcement Administration was still in the review process when Trump succeeded Biden in January, triggering a re-examination of policies across the federal government. What would reclassifying marijuana mean? Reclassifying marijuana would not make it legal for recreational use by adults nationwide. Rather, it would change the way it's regulated and taxed. Federal income tax deductions for business expenses aren't available to enterprises involved in 'trafficking' any Schedule I or II drug. Changing marijuana to a Schedule III drug could mean significant tax savings for businesses licensed to sell marijuana in states where it is legal. It also could make it easier to research marijuana, since it's very difficult to conduct authorized clinical studies on Schedule I substances. Due to the potential for federal penalties, many banks and financial institutions don't provide debit or credit services, loans or other common banking products to marijuana businesses authorized under state laws. That's unlikely to change merely by rescheduling marijuana under the federal Controlled Substances Act, according to a Congressional Research Service report. What is there for Trump to consider? Trump is weighing the pros and cons of a marijuana policy change, noting it's a 'very complicated subject.' 'I've heard great things having to do with medical' use of marijuana and 'bad things having to do with just about everything else,' Trump said Monday. Marijuana advocacy groups have long pushed for the federal government to soften its stance. As a candidate, Trump appeared open to relaxed regulation, posting on his social media platform last year that he would 'focus on research to unlock the medical uses of marijuana to a Schedule 3 drug.' But reclassification faces resistance from some conservatives and law enforcement groups. The National Sheriffs' Association was among those submitting written opposition, highlighting prior determinations that marijuana has a 'high abuse potential' and pointing to cases of 'extreme intoxication' and fatal vehicle crashes. What's happening in the states? The medical use of marijuana is already allowed in 40 states and the District of Columbia. Over the past dozen years, the number of jurisdictions legalizing recreational marijuana for adults rose rapidly to 24 states and the District of Columbia. But the movement suffered some recent setbacks. Ballot measures to legalize recreational marijuana failed last fall in Florida, North Dakota and South Dakota. Florida's measure received a majority vote, which would have been sufficient in most states, but fell short of the 60% threshold needed to approve amendments to the state constitution. Idaho lawmakers this year referred a proposed constitutional amendment to the ballot that would forbid citizen initiatives to legalize marijuana and instead leave such decisions only to the Legislature. Initiatives continue elsewhere to try to place recreational marijuana on the ballot, including in Oklahoma, where voters defeated a measure in 2023. What does the data say about marijuana use? About 6 in 10 voters across the country said they favor legalizing recreational use nationwide, according to AP VoteCast, a survey of more than 120,000 U.S. voters conducted during last year's election. Polling from Gallup shows support for marijuana legalization has grown significantly, from just 36% support in 2005 to 68% last year. Marijuana use has also increased. More than 64 million Americans age 12 and older — or 22.3% of people — used marijuana during the past year, according to a 2024 national survey released recently by the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. That was up from 19% of people in 2021. The growth in marijuana use was driven by adults aged 26 and older, according to the survey. However, people ages 18-25 remained the most likely to partake in marijuana, with 35% reporting use during the past year.
Fox News
a minute ago
- Fox News
DOGE lands big legal win as appeals court strikes down preliminary injunction
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) landed a major legal win on Tuesday. A federal appeals court has ruled DOGE can access certain potentially sensitive data on Americans – from the Departments of Education, Treasury and from the Office of Personnel Management. A panel of judges from the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals lifted a preliminary injunction that had blocked access temporarily, citing privacy concerns. The computerized data could include access to Social Security numbers and immigration and citizenship status. The case will continue to be litigated on the merits, but for now it is a legal victory for the Trump administration. This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
