Proposed Act Ties Federal Crime Grants to Cash Bail Policies, Penalizing Local Reform Efforts

The “Keep Violent Criminals Off Our Streets Act” is short and punchy, but it packs a serious punch aimed directly at local governments that have tried to reform their cash bail systems. Essentially, this bill uses federal funding as a lever, telling states and cities they can’t get certain crime-fighting grants from the Attorney General if they have policies that “substantially limit” the use of cash bail for people charged with specific crimes.

The Federal Funding Ultimatum

Think of it like this: the federal government is offering a pot of money for local law enforcement, but only if they stick to a specific set of rules regarding who has to pay cash to get out of jail before trial. If a city or county decides to stop using cash bail for certain offenses—say, because they want to stop penalizing people just for being poor—they lose access to that federal cash starting the next fiscal year (SEC. 2). For busy city managers or police chiefs relying on those grants for everything from training to equipment, this forces a tough choice: keep the local reform or keep the federal money.

What Counts as a 'Covered Offense'?

This is where the bill gets interesting—and potentially broad. The “covered offenses” aren't just the obvious, high-level violent crimes like murder, rape, or carjacking, which most jurisdictions already take seriously. The list also includes what the bill calls “Crimes Promoting Disorder,” such as looting, vandalism, rioting, and running away from a police officer. This broad definition means that if a jurisdiction decides to limit cash bail for, say, low-level vandalism or certain types of property crime, they could trigger the loss of federal funding. This provision essentially pressures local governments to maintain cash bail for a wide range of offenses, including those that reformers often target for change.

The Real-World Cost of Reform

For everyday people, this bill creates pressure on local budgets and justice systems. Imagine a city that has successfully implemented a policy where low-income defendants accused of minor property crimes are released without cash bail, allowing them to keep their jobs and support their families while awaiting trial. If this bill passes, that city could suddenly lose millions in federal funding, forcing them to either roll back the reform—meaning more low-income people are stuck in jail pre-trial—or find a way to plug the massive hole in their police budget. This bill makes the cost of justice reform incredibly high for the communities trying to implement it, disproportionately affecting low-income defendants who rely on those reforms to avoid unnecessary pre-trial detention.