President DonaldTrump has enacted a series of executive actions targeting the contentious practice of cashless bail in various U.S. cities, marking a significant shift in pretrial detention policies.

On Monday, Trump signed orders that could lead to the cessation of cashless bail practices and potentially withdraw federal funding from jurisdictions that retain such policies, as the New York Post reports.

The actions directed the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s office to pursue federal charges against defendants in Washington, D.C., whenever feasible. Additionally, Attorney General Pam Bondi has been tasked with identifying jurisdictions that have largely done away with cash bail within the next 30 days. These measures may result in a suspension or termination of federal funds for the identified areas.

Federal funding tied to bail policies

The District of Columbia has long prohibited the use of cash as a condition for release, a practice that dates back to 1992. New York followed suit in 2019, eliminating cash bail for most misdemeanors and non-violent felonies. These policies were enacted as part of broader criminal justice reforms but have drawn significant criticism, culminating in Trump’s recent actions.

Trump has encouraged Congress to tighten laws concerning cashless bail, advocating for stricter measures. Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York has expressed her intention to sponsor related legislation, signaling possible legislative support for Trump's orders.

Jurisdictions like New York state and New York City, which receive substantial federal funding, particularly for Medicaid and social safety-net programs, could feel the impact of these new directives. There is a possibility these funds might be at risk should the federal government enforce these policies rigorously.

Impact, criticism of local pretrial policies

In the second of three executive orders, Trump denounced D.C.’s pretrial release process, arguing it contributes to increased crime by allowing offenders to remain free. The administration aims to enhance public safety through a more stringent pretrial detention process.

The third order focuses on retaining defendants in federal custody within D.C., underscoring the administration's commitment to combating crime by holding as many suspects in custody as possible. White House staff secretary Will Scharf explained that the goal is to bring more suspects under federal jurisdiction, thereby subjecting them to federal charges.

Recent actions by the Department of Justice, including the cancellation of grants not directly linked to public safety, reflect the federal government’s growing interest in revisiting bail practices. Current U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro has been outspoken about local laws that prevent the detention of younger offenders, further highlighting tensions surrounding cash bail policies.

D.C. National Guard involved in safety plan

The orders also direct the creation of a specialized unit in the D.C. National Guard, tasked with ensuring public safety. This move reflects the administration’s broader strategy to maintain order and security in the nation’s capital.

Critics argue that eliminating cashless bail could disproportionately impact low-income defendants, many of whom cannot afford bail and may, therefore, remain in custody pending trial.

This point has been a central argument for advocates of cashless bail, who view the traditional bail system as inherently discriminatory.

The president, however, has rebutted these arguments, pointing to public safety as the primary concern.

During the signing, Trump stated, “They thought it was discriminatory to make people put up money,” but emphasized the need for stringent detention practices.

Reactions, financial implications awaited

Already, reactions to Trump’s orders are mixed. Lawmakers like Stefanik are poised to introduce supporting legislation, while others remain skeptical about the financial and ethical implications of these changes.

Trump’s remarks about D.C. facilities also highlight another challenge: the quality of detention spaces.

He expressed concern about the conditions in D.C. prisons, calling them “horrible," though it remains uncertain how this will be addressed in the context of more federal detentions.

Given the foundational changes proposed, the coming weeks will likely see debates on the practical implications of the orders, both in terms of public safety and the potential fiscal burden on state and local governments.