logo
When Nevada charges prison fees, mothers pay the price

When Nevada charges prison fees, mothers pay the price

Yahoo13-05-2025
(Getty Images Plus)
Over the past four decades, the number of women incarcerated in the criminal justice system has surged by more than 585 percent, placing a growing financial burden on them through fines and fees. This burden is especially devastating because women often enter the system at a significant economic disadvantage, making it even harder to navigate and recover from monetary sanctions.
Amber Foster — a commercial truck driver, advocate with Return Strong, and mother of four based in Las Vegas — experienced the financial and psychological burdens of fee debt during her eight year sentence in Nevada.
When Foster was incarcerated, her mother took over primary care of her children, even though she was suffering from rheumatoid arthritis and surviving on SSI benefits. 'What many people don't really understand is that it's not just the person who is incarcerated, our families are incarcerated with us,' Foster said.
Research shows that when prisons impose fines and fees, it is entire families – specifically women – who pay the price. One study on the fees imposed on incarcerated people across 14 states found that 83% of the family members shouldering these costs were women. Most often, it's mothers who pay.
These fees are not about accountability—their primary function is to raise revenue. And when you consider the full weight of court debt on incarcerated people and their families, it becomes clear: these monetary sanctions amount to a form of double punishment, compounding the consequences of incarceration long after a sentence has been served. Though often framed as a tool for accountability, in reality, the imposition of fines and fees often extract money from people with no means to pay, driving them further into debt that follows them for years after release.
The burden of court debt falls especially hard on women, particularly mothers. It erodes their sense of identity and the pride that comes from being a provider. 'Being a mom to me means being their financial provider and protector. It hurt for me not to be able to be there financially. There was a time when they were homeless and I wasn't able to help,' said Foster. A study from the Center for American Progress underscores this, finding that almost two-thirds of women, and more than two-thirds of Black women, were either the primary or co-providers for their households.
Even when families are able to send money to their loved ones inside, those funds are often siphoned off for debt repayment. As Foster notes, 'let's say my mom put $100, I would only get $20. They were taking like 80% of it [for restitution, fines, fees, and medical bills], Foster explained. 'A couple of times I had to call my uncle because my mom was out of food, because she would send the money to me.'
In Nevada, as in the majority of states across the country, fees imposed on a single person often translates into a decades-long debt sentence for their entire family. A recent national survey on the impacts of fines and fees found that 99% of parents impacted by court debt were forced to cut back on at least one essential need. This translates to 17 million households facing food or housing insecurity or lacking another basic need. For women who are already at socio-economic disadvantage, the burden of court debt is doubly amplified. As Foster noted,'Without all the fines and fees payments, I could have gotten a car, a down payment for an apartment, clothes for my daughter and son, money for my mom,' she added. 'It could have done wonders.'
With multiple fee-traps laced throughout the criminal legal system, Nevada is one of the most expensive places to be incarcerated in the U.S. Commissary markups — or fees on items purchased from commissary — once climbed as high as 66%, resulting in massive profits for the state at the expense of families. Thanks to recent reforms, however, markups capped at 35%, meaning families will now see their dollars go further when supporting loved ones. In addition, Nevada passed legislation eliminating markups on hygiene items, room-and-board fees, and medical co-pays, taking an essential step toward protecting the health of incarcerated people and easing the financial load on families.
But we still have work to do. One man released after nearly 15 years in prison received a letter from the Nevada Department of Corrections demanding $7,216.76 in medical debt, payable within 30 days. To meet that demand, one would need to earn $115,000 annually without spending a dollar on basic needs. It's not just cruel, it's impossible.
The financial toll is just one part of the story. The emotional and psychological toll is just as crushing. Foster noted how difficult it was to be a mother when your only means of connection to your child is being blocked by fees. 'Letters and phone calls were how we stayed connected. There were times I couldn't call them because I didn't have money for the phone call fees. The system is made to break you. If you don't have a strong mindset it will break you.'
Right now, the Nevada Legislature has another opportunity to support mothers and families of people who are currently and formerly incarcerated by passing SB88, which would discharge medical debt upon release from prison, and SB323, which makes a pilot program that allowed 15 minutes of free phone calls for women in the women' s prisons permanent. Additionally, lawmakers have the chance to pass SB120, which would require judges to offer payment plans, at no cost, for fines and fees and end public defender fees. These critical reforms recognize that incarceration should not come with a lifelong debt sentence that prevents people rebuilding their lives and caring for their children.
Nevada has already demonstrated leadership in eliminating exploitative fees that burden struggling families and hinder successful reintegration. This session, the state has a chance to actively support women like Foster, who have risen above unimaginable trauma and hardship to rebuild their lives and provide for their families.
By continuing to eliminate these court-imposed costs, and passing reforms like SB 88, SB 120, and SB323, Nevada can serve as a model for a compassionate, rehabilitative justice system that puts people first – not profit.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judge gives ex-officer nearly 3 years in Breonna Taylor raid, rebuffs DOJ call for no prison time
Judge gives ex-officer nearly 3 years in Breonna Taylor raid, rebuffs DOJ call for no prison time

Los Angeles Times

timean hour ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Judge gives ex-officer nearly 3 years in Breonna Taylor raid, rebuffs DOJ call for no prison time

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A federal judge on Monday sentenced a former Kentucky police officer to nearly three years in prison for using excessive force during the deadly 2020 Breonna Taylor raid, rebuffing a U.S. Department of Justice recommendation of no prison time for the defendant. Brett Hankison, who fired 10 shots during the raid but didn't hit anyone, was the only officer on the scene charged in the Black woman's death. He is the first person sentenced to prison in the case that rocked the city of Louisville and spawned weeks of street protests over police brutality that year. U.S. District Judge Rebecca Grady Jennings, in sentencing Hankison, said no prison time 'is not appropriate' and would minimize the jury's verdict from November. Jennings said she was 'startled' there weren't more people injured in the raid from Hankison's blind shots. She sentenced Hankison, 49, to 33 months in prison for the conviction of use of excessive force with three years of supervised probation to follow the prison term. He will not report directly to prison. The U.S. Bureau of Prisons will determine where and when he starts his sentence, Jennings said. The judge, who presided over two of Hankison's trials, expressed disappointment with a sentencing recommendation by federal prosecutors last week, saying the Justice Department was treating Hankison's actions as 'an inconsequential crime' and said some of its arguments were 'incongruous and inappropriate.' Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who helped Taylor's family secure a $12 million wrongful death settlement against the city of Louisville, had called the department's recommendation 'an insult to the life of Breonna Taylor and a blatant betrayal of the jury's decision.' Crump was at Monday's hearing and said he had hoped for a longer sentence but was 'grateful that (Hankison) is at least going to prison and has to think for those 3 years about Breonna Taylor and that her life mattered.' Afterward, before a crowd outside the courthouse, Crump sounded a familiar chant: 'Say Her name.' The crowd yelled back: 'Breonna Taylor!' And he and other members of Taylor family's legal team issued a subsequent statement criticizing the Justice Department. 'While today's sentence is not what we had hoped for –– nor does it fully reflect the severity of the harm caused –– it is more than what the Department of Justice sought. That, in itself, is a statement,' the statement said. Hankison's 10 shots the night of the March 2020 botched drug raid flew through the walls of Taylor's apartment into a neighboring apartment, narrowly missing a neighboring family. The 26-year-old's death, along with the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, sparked racial injustice and police brutality protests nationwide that year. But the Justice Department, under new leadership since President Donald Trump took office in January, sought no prison time for Hankison, in an abrupt about-face by federal prosecutors after the department spent years prosecuting the former detective. They suggested time already served, which amounted to one day, and three years of supervised probation. Taylor's mother, Tamika Palmer, said she was disappointed that the new federal prosecutors assigned to the case were not pushing for a tougher sentence. On many occasions inside the courtroom Monday, lead federal prosecutor Rob Keenan agreed with Hankison's defense attorneys on factors that would decrease Hankison's punishment. 'There was no prosecution in there for us,' Palmer said afterward. 'Brett had his own defense team, I didn't know he got a second one.' Taylor was shot in her hallway by two officers after her boyfriend fired from inside the apartment, striking an officer in the leg. Neither of the other officers was charged in state or federal court after prosecutors deemed they were justified in returning fire into the apartment. Louisville police used a drug warrant to enter Taylor's apartment, but found no drugs or cash inside. A separate jury deadlocked on federal charges against Hankison in 2023, and he was acquitted on state charges of wanton endangerment in 2022. In their recent sentencing memo, federal prosecutors wrote that though Hankison's 'response in these fraught circumstances was unreasonable given the benefit of hindsight, that unreasonable response did not kill or wound Breonna Taylor, her boyfriend, her neighbors, defendant's fellow officers, or anyone else.' Jennings acknowledged Monday that officers were provoked by Taylor's boyfriend's gunshot but said 'that does not allow officers to then do what they want and then be excused.' While the hearing was going on, Louisville police arrested four people in front of the courthouse who it said were 'creating confrontation, kicking vehicles, or otherwise creating an unsafe environment.' Authorities didn't list charges against them. Federal prosecutors had argued that multiple factors — including that Hankison's two other trials ended with no convictions — should greatly reduce the potential punishment. They also argued he would be susceptible to abuse in prison and suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder. The sentencing memorandum was submitted by Harmeet Dhillon, chief of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division and a Trump political appointee who in May moved to cancel settlements with Louisville and Minneapolis that had called for overhauling their police departments. In the Taylor case, three other ex-Louisville police officers have been charged with crafting a falsified warrant, but have not gone to trial. None were at the scene when Taylor was shot. The warrant used to enter her apartment was one of five issued that night in search of evidence on an alleged drug dealer that Taylor once had an association with. Lovan writes for the Associated Press.

Video Shows Florida Cops Beat Black Man After He Questioned Why He Was Stopped Over Headlights During Daytime
Video Shows Florida Cops Beat Black Man After He Questioned Why He Was Stopped Over Headlights During Daytime

Black America Web

time3 hours ago

  • Black America Web

Video Shows Florida Cops Beat Black Man After He Questioned Why He Was Stopped Over Headlights During Daytime

Source: Harry M. Daniels LLC / Wukela Communications Another day, another group of police officers exposed after committing egregious acts of police brutality against a Black man who was simply asking why he was pulled over and why he was being ordered to exit his vehicle. A video has recently gone viral, showing 22-year-old William McNeil Jr. being stopped by a Jacksonville, Florida, police officer on Feb. 19. The officer told McNeil he stopped him because his headlights weren't on, despite it appearing to be daytime. So, an understandably confused Black man points out that the cop's reason for the stop doesn't make sense. Then he's asked, for no discernible reason, to get out of his car, and when he doesn't immediately follow that demand, well, you can see in the video below what happens next. From ABC News: In the video, officers with the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office say they pulled McNeil over because the vehicle's headlights were not on. McNeil questioned the traffic stop because it wasn't raining and it was still light outside. An officer, who cannot be seen in the video, is heard saying, 'It doesn't matter, you're still required to have headlights on.' An officer asks McNeil to step out of the car, and when McNeil asks for the officer's supervisor, another officer punches the driver's window until it shatters. The officer then punches McNeil in the head before unlocking the vehicle door, unbuckling his seatbelt and forcibly removing him from the driver's seat. Once out of the vehicle, multiple officers then gather around McNeil. One officer is seen grabbing McNeil's head and punching him in the chin before forcing him to the ground. Florida law states clearly that motorists must use their headlights 'from sunset to sunrise, including twilight hours,' or 'during any rain, smoke, or fog.' So, the officer didn't have a real reason to pull McNeil over in the first place, and there's plenty of reason to wonder what the officer was really fishing for that prompted him to weasel his way around probable cause. While we're all wondering about that, we might as well wonder why McNeil's completely reasonable inquiry as to why he was pulled over was responded to by a demand that he exit his car. For what? To search him and his vehicle? Why? Did McNeil's failure to operate his headlights in broad daylight provide reasonable suspicion that he needed to be further detained and searched? It appears that even before breaking his car window, dragging him out and beating on him, these cops already had every intention of violating McNeil's civil rights, and their fragile blue egos sent them over the top once they saw McNeil wouldn't let said violations go unchallenged. On Sunday, civil attorneys Ben Crump and Harry Daniels announced McNeil retained them to represent him. 'I am absolutely disgusted by the actions of these officers but, unfortunately, I'm not surprised,' Daniels said in a statement. 'The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office has a long history of this kind of needless violence and brutality.' In his own statement, Crump noted correctly that 'it should be obvious to anyone watching this video that William McNeil wasn't a threat to anyone.' 'He was calmly exercising his constitutional rights, and they beat him for it,' he added. A statement sent to NewsOne from Crump's office reads: 'This is only the latest in a long line of excessive force incidents involving the JSO. In September 2023, the department was the focus of a national outcry after a video of JSO officers violently beating 24-year-old Le'Keian Woods while he was unarmed went viral. In 2019, JSO officers faced a federal lawsuit for killing 22-year-old Jamee Johnson after pulling him over for an alleged seat belt violation.' Meanwhile, Jacksonville Sheriff T.K. Waters issued a statement Sunday, saying, 'We are aware of a video circulating on social media showing a traffic stop represented to be from February 19, 2025.' 'We have launched an internal investigation into it and the circumstances surrounding this incident,' Waters continued. 'We hold our officers to the highest standards and are committed to thoroughly determining exactly what occurred.' It's worth noting that Waters announced this internal investigation a full five months after the incident took place, begging the question: Would there be any investigation at all if the video hadn't recently gone viral? These cops conducted what should be considered an illegal stop, broke McNeil's window, forcibly pulled him out of the car, and beat him like it was just another day. That's how ingrained police violence against Black people is in the very culture of policing. Hopefully, William McNeil Jr. receives all of the justice he is owed. SEE ALSO: Virginia Funeral Home Faces Lawsuit After Black Man Was Allegedly Found Covered In Maggots During Viewing NC Troopers Fired After Cover-Up In Black Man's Death, Attorneys Say It's 'Only One Step Towards Justice' SEE ALSO Video Shows Florida Cops Beat Black Man After He Questioned Why He Was Stopped Over Headlights During Daytime was originally published on

Judge gives ex-officer nearly 3 years in Breonna Taylor raid, rebuffs DOJ call for no prison time
Judge gives ex-officer nearly 3 years in Breonna Taylor raid, rebuffs DOJ call for no prison time

Chicago Tribune

time7 hours ago

  • Chicago Tribune

Judge gives ex-officer nearly 3 years in Breonna Taylor raid, rebuffs DOJ call for no prison time

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A federal judge on Monday sentenced a former Kentucky police officer to nearly three years in prison for using excessive force during the deadly Breonna Taylor raid five years ago, rebuffing a U.S. Department of Justice recommendation of no prison time for the defendant. Brett Hankison, who fired 10 shots during the raid but didn't hit anyone, was the only officer on the scene charged in the Black woman's death in 2020. He is the first person sentenced to prison in the case that rocked the city of Louisville and spawned weeks of street protests over police brutality five years ago. U.S. District Judge Rebecca Grady Jennings sentenced Hankison at a hearing Monday afternoon in which she said no prison time 'is not appropriate' for Hankison. She also said she was 'startled' that there weren't more people injured in the raid. She sentenced him to 33 months in prison as well as three years of supervised probation. Hankison will not report directly to prison. Jennings said the Bureau of Prisons will determine where and when he starts his sentence. Jennings expressed disappointment with federal prosecutors' sentencing memo filed last week, saying the Justice Department treated Hankison's actions as 'an inconsequential crime,' and said the memo was 'incongruous and inappropriate.' Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who helped Taylor's family secure a $12 million wrongful death settlement against the city of Louisville and was present Mondya, had called the Justice Department recommendation 'an insult to the life of Breonna Taylor and a blatant betrayal of the jury's decision.' He said Monday afternoon that he had hoped Hankison would get more time. But, he said: 'We are grateful that he is at least going to prison and has to think for those 3 years about Breonna Taylor and that her life mattered.' And afterward, before a crowd gathered outside the courthouse, Crump yelled: 'Say Her name.' The crowd yelled back: 'Breonna Taylor!' Hankison fired his weapon the night of the March 2020 botched drug raid, his shot flying through the walls of Taylor's apartment into a neighboring apartment without hitting or injuring anyone. The 26-year-old's death, along with the May 2020 police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, sparked racial injustice protests nationwide that year. Last week, the U.S. Justice Department recommended no prison time for Hankison, in an abrupt about-face by federal prosecutors that has angered critics after the department spent years prosecuting the former detective. The Justice Department, which has changed leadership under President Donald Trump since Hankison's conviction, said in a sentencing memo last week that 'there is no need for a prison sentence to protect the public' from Hankison. Federal prosecutors suggested time already served, which amounts to one day, and three years of supervised probation. Prosecutors at his previous federal trials aggressively pursued a conviction against Hankison, 49, arguing that he blindly fired 10 shots into Taylor's windows without identifying a target. Taylor was shot in her hallway by two other officers after her boyfriend fired from inside the apartment, striking an officer in the leg. Neither of the other officers was charged in state or federal court after prosecutors deemed they were justified in returning fire into the apartment. Louisville police used a drug warrant to enter the apartment, but found no drugs or cash inside. A separate jury deadlocked on federal charges against Hankison in 2023, and he was acquitted on state charges of wanton endangerment in 2022. In their recent sentencing memo, federal prosecutors wrote that though Hankison's 'response in these fraught circumstances was unreasonable given the benefit of hindsight, that unreasonable response did not kill or wound Breonna Taylor, her boyfriend, her neighbors, defendant's fellow officers, or anyone else.' On Monday, the Louisville Metro Police Department arrested four people in front of the courthouse who it said were 'creating confrontation, kicking vehicles, or otherwise creating an unsafe environment.' Authorities didn't list the charges those arrested would face. 'We understand this case caused pain and damaged trust between our department and the community,' a police statement said. 'We particularly respect and value the 1st Amendment. However, what we saw today in front of the courthouse in the street was not safe, acceptable or legal.' A U.S. Probation Office presentencing report had said Hankison should face a range of 135 to 168 months imprisonment on the excessive force conviction, according to the memo. But federal prosecutors said multiple factors — including that Hankison's two other trials ended with no convictions — should greatly reduce the potential punishment. The memorandum was submitted by Harmeet Dhillon, chief of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division and a Trump political appointee who in May moved to cancel settlements with Louisville and Minneapolis that had called for overhauling their police departments. In the Taylor case, three other ex-Louisville police officers have been charged with crafting a falsified warrant, but have not gone to trial. None were at the scene when Taylor was shot.

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