logo
Prison debt is crushing Black women, advocates say

Prison debt is crushing Black women, advocates say

Axios5 days ago
Nearly all states allowing jails and prisons to charge incarcerated people for room and board or medical care highlights a deeper problem: their families, especially Black women, are forced to cover the costs, according to a new report.
Why it matters: Black people account for about 37% of the local jail and state prison population, according to Prison Policy Initiative, and the debt caused by the incarceration fees may be pushing women of color deeper into poverty.
The big picture: When incarcerated individuals can't pay — and most can't — the debt is passed to a loved one or follows them after release.
In some states, advocates say that debt collectors or probation officers send letters demanding full repayment within 30 days.
And taxpayers can wind up footing the bill for costly legal pursuits that don't result in payments.
By the numbers: Data collected by the advocacy group Campaign Zero, reviewed by Axios earlier this month, shows:
As of December 2024, 48 states allow at least one "pay-to-stay" fee.
42 states and D.C. permit room and board charges for incarcerated adults.
43 states permit medical fees for incarcerated adults.
Zoom in: Fees are automatically pulled from prison accounts or wages. But most incarcerated people earn less than $1/day, according to data from the Prison Policy Initiative, so balances grow — and carry into life after release.
Because many incarcerated people can't fully pay fees while in prison, the costs often pile up as debt they're still expected to repay after their release, Campaign Zero executive director DeRay Mckesson told Axios.
Zoom out: Research compiled by the advocacy group Fines and Fees Justice Center (FFJC) shows that women — especially Black women — are disproportionately harmed by these policies.
83% of those paying fines, fees, and bail for incarcerated people are women, according to a national survey.
Women's wages drop more post-conviction than men's — $75/year vs. $26.
Black mothers are three times more likely than white mothers to be their family's sole provider.
What they're saying: "We were the first to put this issue on the map — people were talking about mass incarceration, but no one was talking about families having their college funds and inheritances seized," said Brittany Friedman, a USC sociologist who leads the Captive Money Lab and was a consultant on the Campaign Zero project.
Friedman said her team analyzed hundreds of civil lawsuits and found a "repeat pattern" of states seizing jointly held assets — including college savings and shared inheritances — if an incarcerated person's name was on the account.
"In most cases, it drains the account completely," she said, noting the court will seize any account with the incarcerated person's name on it — even if it's a college fund or a shared inheritance.
Context: Many pay-to-stay laws date back to the 1970s, as states such as Michigan and California sought to shift the costs of incarceration off public budgets.
The trend grew in the 1980s, after federal funding cuts under President Reagan, as states began charging incarcerated people for court-appointed counsel, supervision, meals and phone calls.
Instead of taxing the public, lawmakers began extracting money from the people being policed and prosecuted, in the form of fees for public defenders, probation supervision, phone calls, and even meals.
"They weren't designed to promote safety or rehabilitation," said Nick Shepack, Nevada director for the FFJC. "They were designed to cut budgets — and they still are."
Yes, but: Some states argue that these fees help cover the costs of victim restitution or public services. But many are imposed even in victimless cases like drug possession.
Friedman said in Illinois, her team found the policy often cost more to enforce than it brought in — due to labor-intensive forensic accounting, lawsuits and appeals.
The intrigue: Several states are moving to roll back these fees.
Oklahoma recently passed a sweeping bill eliminating many fees.
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore waived $13 million in unpaid probation fees earlier this year.
Nevada capped the amount that prisons can garnish from family deposits and ended post-release collections of medical debt.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

4th man accused in fatal dogpile outside Milwaukee hotel pleads guilty

time21 minutes ago

4th man accused in fatal dogpile outside Milwaukee hotel pleads guilty

MADISON, Wis. -- The last of four Milwaukee hotel workers accused of killing a man by pinning him to the ground has pleaded guilty to being a party to felony murder. Former Hyatt Hotel security guard Todd Erickson entered the plea in connection with D'Vontaye Mitchell's death in Milwaukee County Circuit Court on Thursday morning, online court records indicate. Erickson was set to go on trial on Aug. 11. He faces up to 15 years in prison when he's sentenced Sept. 3. His attorney, Kerri Cleghorn, didn't immediately return a voicemail left at her office. Erickson's plea moves a massive criminal case reminiscent of George Floyd's death a step closer to resolution. According to investigators, Mitchell ran into the Hyatt's lobby in June 2024 and went into the women's bathroom. Two women later told detectives that Mitchell tried to lock them in the bathroom. Security guard Brandon Turner pulled Mitchell out of the bathroom and together with a guest dragged him out of the lobby onto a hotel driveway. Turner, Erickson, bellhop Herbert Williamson and front desk worker Devin Johnson-Carson continued to struggle with Mitchell before taking him to the ground and piling on top of him, according to a criminal complaint. Hotel surveillance video shows Johnson-Carson holding Mitchell's legs while Erickson, Turner and Williamson held down his upper body. They kept him pinned for eight to nine minutes. By the time emergency responders arrived, Mitchell had stopped breathing. A medical examiner later determined that Mitchell was morbidly obese, suffered from heart disease, and had cocaine and methamphetamine in his system. The medical examiner concluded that he had suffocated and ruled his death a homicide. Attorneys for Mitchell's family have likened his death to the murder of Floyd, a Black man who died in 2020 after a white Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for about nine minutes. Floyd's death sparked a national reckoning on racial relations. Mitchell was Black. Court records identify Erickson as white and Turner, Williamson and Johnson-Carson as Black. The four workers told investigators that Mitchell was strong and tried to bite Erickson, but they didn't mean to hurt him. Ambridge Hospitality, the company that manages the Hyatt, fired all four of them in July 2024. Turner, Williamson and Johnson-Carson were all charged with being a party to felony murder along with Erickson. Turner pleaded guilty to that count this past March. Williamson and Johnson-Carson both pleaded guilty to a reduced count of misdemeanor battery that same month. All three are set to be sentenced Sept. 3, the same day as Erickson.

A 4th man accused in a fatal dogpile outside a Milwaukee hotel pleads guilty to felony murder
A 4th man accused in a fatal dogpile outside a Milwaukee hotel pleads guilty to felony murder

Hamilton Spectator

timean hour ago

  • Hamilton Spectator

A 4th man accused in a fatal dogpile outside a Milwaukee hotel pleads guilty to felony murder

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The last of four Milwaukee hotel workers accused of killing a man by pinning him to the ground has pleaded guilty to being a party to felony murder. Former Hyatt Hotel security guard Todd Erickson entered the plea in connection with D'Vontaye Mitchell's death in Milwaukee County Circuit Court on Thursday morning, online court records indicate. Erickson was set to go on trial on Aug. 11. He faces up to 15 years in prison when he's sentenced Sept. 3. His attorney, Kerri Cleghorn, didn't immediately return a voicemail left at her office. Erickson's plea moves a massive criminal case reminiscent of George Floyd's death a step closer to resolution. According to investigators, Mitchell ran into the Hyatt's lobby in June 2024 and went into the women's bathroom. Two women later told detectives that Mitchell tried to lock them in the bathroom. Security guard Brandon Turner pulled Mitchell out of the bathroom and together with a guest dragged him out of the lobby onto a hotel driveway. Turner, Erickson, bellhop Herbert Williamson and front desk worker Devin Johnson-Carson continued to struggle with Mitchell before taking him to the ground and piling on top of him, according to a criminal complaint. Hotel surveillance video shows Johnson-Carson holding Mitchell's legs while Erickson, Turner and Williamson held down his upper body. They kept him pinned for eight to nine minutes. By the time emergency responders arrived, Mitchell had stopped breathing. A medical examiner later determined that Mitchell was morbidly obese, suffered from heart disease, and had cocaine and methamphetamine in his system. The medical examiner concluded that he had suffocated and ruled his death a homicide. Attorneys for Mitchell's family have likened his death to the murder of Floyd, a Black man who died in 2020 after a white Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for about nine minutes. Floyd's death sparked a national reckoning on racial relations. Mitchell was Black. Court records identify Erickson as white and Turner, Williamson and Johnson-Carson as Black. The four workers told investigators that Mitchell was strong and tried to bite Erickson, but they didn't mean to hurt him. Ambridge Hospitality, the company that manages the Hyatt, fired all four of them in July 2024. Turner, Williamson and Johnson-Carson were all charged with being a party to felony murder along with Erickson. Turner pleaded guilty to that count this past March. Williamson and Johnson-Carson both pleaded guilty to a reduced count of misdemeanor battery that same month. All three are set to be sentenced Sept. 3, the same day as Erickson. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

Police and Courts Are Turning to AI. Is the System Ready for It?
Police and Courts Are Turning to AI. Is the System Ready for It?

Time​ Magazine

time2 hours ago

  • Time​ Magazine

Police and Courts Are Turning to AI. Is the System Ready for It?

Can AI be used to make the criminal justice system more fair and efficient, or will it only reinforce harmful biases? Experts say that it has so far been deployed in worrying ways—but that there is potential for positive impact. Today, AI tech has reached nearly every aspect of the criminal justice system. It is being used in facial recognition systems to identify suspects; in 'predictive policing' strategies to formulate patrol routes; in courtrooms to assist with case management; and by public defenders to cull through evidence. But while advocates point to an increase in efficiency and fairness, critics raise serious questions around privacy and accountability. Last month, the Council on Criminal Justice launched a nonpartisan task force on AI, to study how AI could be used in the criminal justice system safely and ethically. The group's work will be supported by researchers at RAND, and they will eventually take their findings and make recommendations to policymakers and law enforcement. 'There's no question that AI can yield unjust results,' says Nathan Hecht, the task force's chair and a former Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice. 'This task force wants to bring together tech people, criminal justice people, community people, experts in various different areas, and really sit down to see how we can use it to make the system better and not cause the harm that it's capable of.' Risks of AI in law enforcement Many courts and police departments are already using AI, Hecht says. 'It's very piecemeal: Curious people going, 'Oh, wow, there's this AI out here, we could use it over in the criminal court.' But because there are few standards for how to deploy AI, civil rights watchdogs have grown concerned that law enforcement agencies are using it in dangerous ways. Thousands of agencies have come to rely upon facial recognition technology sold by companies like Clearview, which hosts a database of billions of images scraped off the internet. In many databases, Black people are overrepresented, in part because they live in communities that are overpoliced. AI technology is also worse at discerning differences in Black people's faces, which can lead to higher misidentification rates. Last year, the Innocence Project, a legal nonprofit, found that there have been at least seven wrongful arrests from facial recognition technology, six of which involved wrongfully accused Black people. Walter Katz, the organization's director of policy, says that police sometimes make arrests solely based on AI's facial recognition findings as opposed to having the AI serve as a starting point for a larger investigation. 'There's an over-reliance on AI outputs,' he says. Katz says that when he went to a policing conference last fall, 'it was AI everywhere.' Vendors were aggressively hawking technology tools that claimed to solve real problems in police departments. 'But in making that pitch, there was little attention to any tradeoffs or risks,' he says. For instance, critics worry that many of these AI tools will increase surveillance of public spaces, including the monitoring of peaceful protesters—or that so-called 'predictive policing' will intensify law enforcement's crackdowns on over-policed areas. Where AI could help However, Katz concedes that AI does have a place in the criminal justice system. 'It'll be very hard to wish AI away—and there are places where AI can be helpful,' he says. For that reason, he joined the Council on Criminal Justice's AI task force. 'First and foremost is getting our arms wrapped around how fast the adoption is. And if everyone comes from the understanding that having no policy whatsoever is probably the wrong place to be, then we build from there.' Hecht, the task force's chair, sees several areas where AI could be helpful in the courtroom, for example, including improving the intake process for arrested people, or helping identify who qualifies for diversion programs, which allow offenders to avoid convictions. He also hopes the task force will provide recommendations on what types of AI usage explicitly should not be approved in criminal justice, and steps to preserve the public's privacy. 'We want to try to gather the expertise necessary to reassure the users of the product and the public that this is going to make your experience with the criminal justice system better—and after that, it's going to leave you alone,' he says. Meanwhile, plenty of other independent efforts are trying to use AI to improve the justice processes. One startup, JusticeText, hopes to use AI to narrow the gap between resources of prosecutors and public defenders, the latter of whom are typically severely understaffed and underresourced. JusticeText built a tool for public defenders that sorts through hours of 911 calls, police body camera footage, and recorded interrogations, in order to analyze it and determine if, for example, police have made inconsistent statements or asked leading questions. 'We really wanted to see what it looks like to be a public defender-first, and try to level that playing field that technology has in many ways exacerbated in past years,' says founder and CEO Devshi Mehrotra. JusticeText is working with around 75 public defender agencies around the country. Recidiviz, a criminal justice reform nonprofit, has also been testing several ways of integrating AI into their workflows, including giving parole officers AI-generated summaries of clients. 'You might have 80 pages of case notes going back seven years on this person that you're not going to read if you have a caseload of 150 people, and you have to see each one of them every month,' says Andrew Warren, Recidiviz's co-founder. 'AI could give very succinct highlights of what this person has already achieved and what they could use support on.' The challenge for policymakers and the Council on Criminal Justice's task force, then, is to determine how to develop standards and oversight mechanisms so that the good from AI's efficiency gains outweigh its ability to amplify existing biases. Hecht, at the task force, also hopes to protect from a future in which a black box AI makes life-changing decisions on its own. 'Should we ensure our traditional ideas of human justice are protected? Of course. Should we make sure that able judges and handlers of the criminal justice system are totally in control? Of course,' he says. 'But saying we're going to keep AI out of the justice system is hopeless. Law firms are using it. The civil justice system is using it. It's here to stay.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store