Proposed Bill Threatens to Cut Pell Grants, Child Welfare Funds for States Allowing Cashless Bail

The proposed legislation, titled the End Cashless Bail to Protect Americans Act of 2025, is straightforward: if a state or local government allows pre-trial release based on a defendant’s promise to appear (personal recognizance) or an unsecured bond, they lose a whole lot of federal funding. This bill aims to force local jurisdictions away from these so-called 'cashless bail' practices by hitting them where it hurts—their budgets. The Attorney General is tasked with identifying these jurisdictions within 30 days of the law passing, and federal agencies would then have 90 days to terminate all funding from a long list of specific grant programs.

The Federal Funding Hammer

When we talk about 'a whole lot of federal funding,' we’re not just talking about police budgets. The bill targets 'covered grant programs,' which include major justice grants like the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (a huge source of funding for local police departments and crime reduction initiatives). But here’s where it gets complicated: the list goes far beyond law enforcement. It includes Pell grants for eligible incarcerated students, workforce development grants under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, and even grants dedicated to child abuse prevention and treatment (sections 105 and 106 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act).

Who Pays the Price?

This isn't just a fight between Washington and state capitals; the consequences land squarely on local services. Imagine a county that adopted a policy allowing judges to use unsecured bonds instead of cash bail for non-violent offenders. Under this bill, that county could lose the federal funding that pays for job training programs for the unemployed (WIOA grants) or the grant money that supports local shelters and services for victims of child abuse. For a young person in prison trying to get a Pell grant to earn a degree and improve their chances after release, that educational opportunity could vanish, even though their education has nothing to do with the county’s bail policy.

Federal Leverage vs. Local Autonomy

This bill sets up a powerful mechanism for the federal government to dictate local criminal justice policy. The Attorney General holds the keys, deciding which local practices qualify as “cashless bail” and putting jurisdictions on the termination list. If a state or city wants its funding back, it has to change its pre-trial release policies to satisfy the federal government. While the bill does include a process to reinstate funds once a government is removed from the list, the threat of losing critical, non-criminal justice funds—like those for child welfare—creates immense pressure on local governments to comply, potentially overriding decisions made at the local level regarding fairness and pre-trial procedures.