New Mexico eliminates parole fees
Starting on June 20, New Mexicans who are on supervised release from prison will no longer have to pay parole fees under a new law Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed on Monday.
The Fines and Fees Justice Center, a criminal justice advocacy group, praised Lujan Grisham's enactment of Senate Bill 375 in a news release on Tuesday morning, calling the new law a 'smart on crime initiative' to lift unnecessary financial barriers that stop people from returning home.
The group said that parole supervision fees can prevent people from successfully reintegrating into their communities when they get out, racking up large debts for the families of people on supervision across the U.S.
Under the old law, New Mexico charged between $25 and $150 per month, with a yearly cap of $1,800, and incarcerated people could not get out on parole until they paid the fees.
About 2,400 New Mexicans were out on parole in 2023, according to the Prison Policy Initiative.
'Every dollar spent on a parole fee could have been a dollar put towards food, childcare or supporting local businesses,' New Mexico State Director Monica Ault said in a statement. 'Ending these fees isn't just the right thing to do — it's smart fiscal policy that can reinvigorate local economies.'
Sen. Antonio 'Moe' Maestas (D-Albuquerque), who sponsored SB375, said Tuesday that ending parole fees 'lifts a huge financial burden off people who have already paid their debt, giving them a real chance to prioritize their families and rebuild their lives.'
'Family is everything to New Mexicans,' Maestas said in a statement. 'This law is the next step in our push to make our communities strong, safe, and prosperous for all.'
New Mexico Corrections Department Cabinet Secretary Alisha Tafoya and her staff wrote the bill, the Fines and Fees Justice Center said.
'We believe that alleviating this financial burden will reduce recidivism by removing barriers for individuals transitioning from prison facilities to communities,' Tafoya Lucero said in a statement. 'This change allows them to, instead, direct their financial resources toward essential needs like housing and transportation, which are key elements for stability and avoiding criminal activity.'
The Fines and Fees Justice Center noted on Tuesday that New Mexico joins dozens of state and local governments in eliminating harmful criminal legal system fees, including the state of Maryland, which scrapped certain supervision fees last October while the governor there erased more than $13 million in outstanding court debt.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
6 days ago
- Axios
Prison debt is crushing Black women, advocates say
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.
New York Post
25-07-2025
- New York Post
Potential fraud victim warns about ‘jury duty scam' that almost stole her money: ‘So convincing'
Victims of these court clerk-impersonating con artists are pleading for justice. People have been receiving calls from scammers saying that they've missed jury duty and there's a warrant out for their arrest. 'The victim will get called by the scammer saying that they missed jury duty, and they're demanding money through either wire transfer or gift cards or something like that,' Bossier Parish Sheriff's Office Public Information Officer Neil Johnston said in a statement. 'That should be the first red flag right there. Never give anybody money that you don't know exactly who they are or your personal information.' Johnston noted that these scams tend to target people of more vulnerable ages. One fifth-grade teacher on TikTok shared a video PSA about the scam after she was 'almost victim to' it. Mrs. Tait received a call with no caller ID — which she said was her first red flag — and the person 'kept calling and calling and calling.' She finally answered the phone, and the person on the other end claimed to be with the local sheriff's office. They had her name and address and claimed that she failed to appear in front of a jury. The caller claimed she received a summons through certified mail that someone signed for, and she had citations for failure to appear in court. People have been receiving calls from scammers saying that they've missed jury duty and there's a warrant out for their arrest. JJ Gouin – According to the Prison Policy Initiative, citations for failure to appear in court are usually given to people who don't show up for a court date in which they are the defendant. Missing jury duty is now a criminal offense and wouldn't lead to a failure to appear citation. Besides, the teacher didn't have any pending charges that would require her to be in court. When she told the caller she didn't trust him, he told her that he wasn't trying to do 'any harm' and that it was his 'job' to provide the information. 'He was so convincing. It was absolutely terrifying,' she said, Tait said she hung up and called the local non-emergency line, and they reaffirmed her suspicions that it was a scam. 'If you fail to appear [for jury duty], it will always come in the mail,' she explained. 'Sometimes deputies will call you for witness stuff, and they will do the no caller ID just to protect their safety. But they were like, 'That's an absolute scam.'' These scams tend to target people of more vulnerable ages. MKPhoto – They told her to always report calls of that nature so they have it on record. Officials said no law enforcement will demand immediate payments over the phone.
The Hill
25-07-2025
- The Hill
Bipartisan senators seek study on wildfire insurance
A pair of bipartisan senators introduced legislation this week that would seek information on how much growing wildfires are costing homeowners. Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.) first shared with The Hill a draft of the Wildfire Insurance Coverage Study Act. Their bill would require the U.S. Comptroller General to study the extent of growing U.S. wildfire risks and whether private companies have refused to issue new policies to homeowners because of those risks. Climate change is worsening droughts and leads to more severe wildfires. While this science has been politicized, dealing with wildfire damage can be an area of consensus. Still, it's not entirely clear if the bill will advance. 'I'm hearing from more and more New Mexicans who've seen their insurance premiums skyrocket, lost coverage entirely, or been priced out of protecting their homes. That is completely unacceptable,' Heinrich said in a written statement. 'We need a clearer picture of how worsening wildfires and climate risks are impacting insurance companies' decisions to raise insurance premiums.' 'One-third of America lives in wildfire-prone areas, and we must get our arms around this crisis, because if you can't get or afford homeowners' insurance, you can't finance your home, which means hardworking families can't achieve homeownership,' Sheehy said in a written statement.
