^ Complaint, Cleveland v. Montgomery, supra note 14, at 2; see Stillman, supra note 11. ^ Naturally, there may be some overlap between this category and the two mentioned above. Because the purpose of costs is not purely or even mostly to punish, they are arguably debts within the text of the state bans. Why Are We Still Sending People to Jail for Being Poor? It's Time to The history of US debtors prisons and abolition of jail time The ACLU had found that debtors' prisons were "flourishing" in this country, "more than two decades after the Supreme Court prohibited imprisoning those who are too poor to pay their legal debts." I, 15; Okla. Const. ^ Id. art. ^ See Shepard, supra note 6, at 152930 (describing the rules origin in the common law precept that creditors must exhaust legal remedies before turning to equitable ones). ^ Under Bearden, what counts as bona fide efforts was left unspecified, apart from vague references to searching for employment or sources of credit. .); see also Jerome Hall, Interrelations of Criminal Law and Torts: I, 43 Colum. Feb. 8, 2015) [hereinafter Complaint, Fant v. Ferguson], http://equaljusticeunderlaw.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Complaint-Ferguson-Debtors-Prison-FILE-STAMPED.pdf [http://perma.cc/MVJ9-Q9CQ]. These courts have ordered the arrest and jailing of people who fall behind on their payments, without affording any hearings to determine an individual's ability to pay or offering alternatives to payment such as community service. Led by James Herttell, Chairman and advocate for abolition, the committee resolved that "all . v. Fritz, 449 U.S. 166, 179 (1980). In October of 2010, the American Civil Liberties Union published a report titled In for a Penny: The Rise of America's New Debtors' Prisons. See, e.g., Ex parte Phillips, 771 So. Const. 1965). Justice Douglas agreed the issue wasnt properly in front of the Court. After the War of 1812, a costly stalemate, more and more Americans were holding debt, and the notion of imprisoning all these debtors seemed increasingly feudal. Moreover, America was seen as a country of immigrants, and many European immigrants had come here to escape debt. art. When the offenders cant pay for all of this, they may be jailed even if they have already served their time for the offense. Cf. See id. art. art. II, 12 (No person shall be imprisoned for debt, unless upon refusal to deliver up his estate for the benefit of his creditors in such manner as shall be prescribed by law, or in cases of tort or where there is a strong presumption of fraud.); Md. Mo. at 131. ^ Recent Legislation, supra note 23, at 1314. Regulating criminal justice debt through both Bearden claims and imprisonment-for-debt claims makes a lot of sense. ^ See, e.g., Telephone Interview with Douglas K. Wilson, supra note 7. In the process, we were lowering our standards for what constituted an offense deserving of imprisonment, and, more broadly, we were losing our sense of how serious, how truly serious, it is to incarcerate. Regular observers of the City court have never once seen an indigence or ability to pay hearing conducted in the past decade.). amend. Knowing that youre behind us means so much. If we can imprison for possession of marijuana, why cant we imprison for not paying back a loan?. Read More. ^ See, e.g., Harrison v. Harrison, 394 S.W.2d 128, 13031 (Ark. (Oct. 10, 2012), http://static.aclu-co.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/2012-10-10-Bender-Dailey-Wallace.pdf [http://perma.cc/5F9Y-U7RC]; Letter from Rebecca T. Wallace, Staff Atty, ACLU of Colo., and Mark Silverstein, Legal Dir., ACLU of Colo., to Herb Atchison, Mayor of Westminster, Colo. (Dec. 16, 2013), http://static.aclu-co.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/2013-12-16-Atchison-ACLU.pdf [http://perma.cc/7ZZS-X3RL]. infra notes 5559 and accompanying text (discussing judicially created solutions in certain states). . Part I describes the contemporary problem with criminal justice debt in greater detail. 1312, 1316 (2015). ^ For example, in 1855, Massachusetts passed a statute saying: Imprisonment for debt is hereby forever abolished in Massachusetts. Appleton, 71 Mass. art. In the United States, debtors' prisons were banned under federal law in 1833. In these cases, the creditor a predatory lender, a landlord, or a utility provider or a debt collector (hired by the creditor) may bypass bankruptcy court and take the debtor straight to civil court. http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/InForAPenny_web.pdf, http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2015/02/08/384332798/civil-rights-attorneys-sue-ferguson-over-debtors-prisons, http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21589903-if-you-are-poor-dont-get-caught-speeding-new-debtors-prisons, http://equaljusticeunderlaw.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Complaint-Ferguson-Debtors-Prison-FILE-STAMPED.pdf, http://equaljusticeunderlaw.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Final-Settlement-Agreement.pdf, http://equaljusticeunderlaw.org/wp/current-cases/ending-debtors-prisons/, http://www.acluohio.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/2013_0404LetterToOhioSupremeCourtChiefJustice.pdf, http://static.aclu-co.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/2012-10-10-Bender-Dailey-Wallace.pdf, http://static.aclu-co.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/2013-12-16-Atchison-ACLU.pdf, http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Publications/JCS/finesCourtCosts.pdf, http://jurist.org/paperchase/2014/02/ohio-supreme-court-warns-judges-to-end-debtors-prisons.php, http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2015/08/judges-order-overhauls-fergusons-municipal-courts/402232, http://www.courts.mo.gov/sup/index.nsf/d45a7635d4bfdb8f8625662000632638/fe656f36d6b518a886257db80081d43c. I, 14; N.J. Const. Also in this category are costs of imprisonment (billed to inmates in 41 states), and of parole and probation (44 states). art. Well never put our work behind a paywall, and well never put a limit on the number of articles you can read. Debtors' Prisons | American Civil Liberties Union I, 19; Pa. Const. at 26065; Becky A. Vogt, State v. Allison: Imprisonment for Debt in South Dakota, 46 S.D. 13. Bearden v. ch. ^ See id. III, 38 ([A] valid decree of a court . shall become a judgment in the same manner and to the same extent as any other judgment under the code of civil procedure.157 In Florida, convicted indigents assessed costs for due process services are expressly provided with the same protections as civil-judgment debtors.158 But not all collections statutes are so explicit, of course.159. II, 12; Fla. Const. ^ See, e.g., Complaint, Jenkins v. Jennings, supra note 24, at 43 (The City prosecutor and City judge do not conduct indigence or ability-to-pay hearings. The United States was, after all, the first major nation to get rid of debt prisons in the 1820s and 1830s and embrace "fresh starts" for bankrupts at a time when "debtors were imprisoned. at 18, misleading information about court dates and appearances, see id. For case law, see, for example, Towsend v. State, 52 S.E. ^ See Civil Rights Div., U.S. Dept of Justice, Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department 4550 (2015) [hereinafter DOJ, Ferguson Investigation], http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf [http://perma.cc/8CQS-NZ9F]. (9 Allen) 489 (1864)). Rev. Def. Def., Office of the State Pub. And more than 30 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court made it clear: Judges cannot send people to jail just because they are too poor to pay their court fines. ^ Cf., e.g., Kimble v. Marvel Entmt, LLC, 135 S. Ct. 2401, 241011 (2015) (identifying the ero[sion] of statutory and doctrinal underpinnings, id. And it seems ill-equipped to protect impoverished debtors who see no reason to embark upon, much less document, futile searches for credit or employment. I, 19; Kan. Const. ^ See ACLU, In for a Penny: The Rise of Americas New Debtors Prisons 17 (2010), http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/InForAPenny_web.pdf [http://perma.cc/2C7C-X56S] (Louisiana); id. and is the first known codification of debt This article has 3 letters to the editor. L.Q. New York released prisoners owing less than $25 in 1818, doubled this threshold in 1825, and abolished imprisonment for debt in 1831. See, e.g., State v. Anton, 463 A.2d 703, 705 (Me. Imprisoning someone because she cannot afford to pay court-imposed fines or fees violates the Fourteenth Amendment promises of due process and equal protection under the law. art. Const. ^ See, e.g., Ala. Const. Read more. 543, 550 n.45 (1976); Note, Imprisonment for Debt: In the Military Tradition, 80 Yale L.J. In Colorado, Linda Robertss offense of shoplifting $21 worth of food resulted in $746 of court costs, fines, fees, and restitution.37 Ms. Roberts, who lived exclusively on SNAP and Social Security disability benefits, sat out her debt by spending fifteen days in jail.38 And in Georgia, Tom Barrett was sentenced to twelve months of probation for stealing a can of beer.39 But six months in, despite selling his blood plasma, Barrett still couldnt pay the costs associated with his sentence including a $12-per-day ankle bracelet, a $50 set-up fee, and a $39-per-month fee to a private probation company and faced imprisonment.40 A 2010 Brennan Center report flagged problematic criminal justice debt practices in fifteen states, including California, Texas, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and New York.41 A 2010 ACLU report claimed that required indigency inquiries the heart of the constitutional protection provided by Bearden were markedly absent in Louisiana, Michigan, Ohio, Georgia, and Washington.42. But there are many reasons to think theres a long road ahead. The problems posed by nineteenth-century debtors prisons in the United States differ in many ways from the challenges posed today by criminal justice debt. L. Rev. 2255s Statute of Limitations. Mo. See Vogt, supra note 94, at 335 n.9; Note, Body Attachment and Body Execution: Forgotten but Not Gone, 17 Wm. . See U.S. Const. According to Martin, this ambiguity has grave consequences. It happens for two reasons. Imprisonment for nonpayment of contractual debt was a normal feature of American commercial life from the colonial era into the beginning of the nineteenth century.93 But with the rise of credit testing and the replacement of personal lending networks with secured credit, imprisonment for nonpayment came to be seen as a harsh and unwieldy sanction,94 and a growing movement pressed for its abolition. This imposes direct costs on the government and further destabilizes the lives of poor people struggling to pay their debts and leave the criminal justice system behind. . Louisianas Debtors Prisons: An Appeal to Justice, https://www.aclumaine.org/en/news/prison-being-poor-time-end-debtors-prison-system-maine, https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-maine-calls-legislature-end-debtors-prisons, filed lawsuits challenging "pay or stay" sentences, 2015, the ACLU of Maine called for an end to practices that result in the jailing of indigent people who cannot afford to pay court fines and fees. In the end, however, imprisonment for debt was abolished not by an organized reform movement but, instead, by substantial changes in commercial practices and the corresponding . . Complaint, Fant v. Ferguson, supra note 48, at 53 (arguing governments may not take advantage of their position to impose unduly harsh methods of collection); Complaint, Jenkins v. Jennings, supra note 24, at 5859 (same). Under the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, the practice is listed as a civil-rights violation. Interpreting fines for regulatory offenses to fall under the bans of many states is consistent with the bans text, purpose, and original meaning. . Const. App. I, 1, XXIII; Haw. Ending Modern-Day Debtors' Prisons | American Civil Liberties Union art. The Act of Congress established penal regulations and restrictions for persons jailed for property debt, tax evasion, and tax resistance. An Appendix to this Note, available on the Harvard Law Review Forum, provides the critical language of each of the forty-one state constitutional bans. art. art. In this process, indigent people who cannot afford to pay court fines and fees are routinely incarcerated in violation of their constitutional rights. The statewide lawsuit was filed on behalf of drivers who have had their drivers licenses suspended in violation of their statutory, due process, and equal protection rights. L. Rev. As noted above, the state bans on debtors prisons have been given short shrift in the legal literature and recent litigation.91 This Part begins by providing a brief historical overview of the state bans92 and then argues that ignoring them is a legal mistake: these imprisonment-for-debt provisions plausibly extend to some parts of contemporary debtors prisons. ^ James v. Strange, 407 U.S. 128, 140 (1972) (quoting Rinaldi v. Yeager, 384 U.S. 305, 309 (1966)). Early prison systems in the United States focused on the power of hard labor, religion, and inhumane conditions to correct persons convicted of petty and serious crimes, as seen in early women's prisons and penitentiaries. that a State may impose unduly harsh or discriminatory terms merely because the obligation is to the public treasury rather than to a private creditor.82 The Court suggested that it was applying rational basis scrutiny, although in light of the Courts strong language some judges have read James as subjecting the classification to some form of heightened scrutiny.83, Similarly, the debtor in Fuller v. Oregon owed fees for an attorney and an investigator.84 But in Fuller, the Court upheld Oregons recoupment statute because the defendant wouldnt be forced to pay unless he was able.85 The majority found that the recoupment statute provided all of the same protections as those provided to other judgment debtors, and was therefore wholly free of the kind of discrimination that was held in James v. Strange to violate the Equal Protection Clause.86 Justice Marshall, joined by Justice Brennan in dissent, cited the Oregon constitutional ban on imprisonment for debt and pointed out that indigent defendants could be imprisoned for failing to pay their court-appointed lawyers, while well-heeled defendants who had stiffed their hired counsel could not.87 The majority opinion pointed out that this issue hadnt been preserved for appeal,88 and opined in dicta that the state ban on imprisonment for debt was an issue for state courts to decide.89 Justice Douglas, concurring in the judgment, agreed, but noted the apparent inconsistency between [the relevant state constitutional provision] and the recoupment statute.90. ^ It may also be worth pointing out that James and Fuller dealt most concretely with attorneys fees. This tiered regulatory model thus gives each state the ability to pursue multiple legitimate ends including both punishment and subsidizing the criminal justice system so long as it doesnt discriminate in applying its own law. All Rights Reserved. Debtors' Prisons, Then and Now: FAQ | The Marshall Project L. Rev. While blacks make up 54 percent of the DeKalb County population, nearly all probationers jailed by the DeKalb County Recorders Court for failure to pay are black a pattern replicated by other Georgia courts. I, 16; Vt. Const. See Appendix, State Bans on Debtors Prisons and Criminal Justice Debt, 129 Harv. at 133.). (Oct. 21, 2014) (notes on file with Harvard Law School Library). To the contrary, regulatory offenses became prominent within American criminal law only after the abolition of debtors prisons.131 The Court in Morissette v. United States132 identified the pilot of the [regulatory offenses] movement in such crimes as selling liquor to an habitual drunkard and selling adulterated milk, citing cases from 1849,133 1864,134 and 1865.135 A law review article published in 1933 called the steadily growing stream of offenses punishable without any criminal intent whatsoever a recent movement in criminal law,136 placing the beginnings of the trend in the middle of the nineteenth century.137 By comparison, all but a few states had enacted their bans on debtors prisons by the 1850s.138 So reading the carve-outs as unrelated to regulatory crimes is consistent with both text and original meaning. Debtors' prisons were supposed to have gone out with the 19th century, but there is evidence that they still exist today in the United States. .); Developments in the Law Policing, 128 Harv. art. 4:15-cv-00252 (E.D. at 39899; Williams, 399 U.S. at 242. 55, 6267 (1933) (tracing the development of public welfare offenses in the United States). ^ See Mass. 774, 776 (Ala. 1938). ^ Id. 1, 11; Ga. Const. In 2013, the ACLU of Ohio issuedOutskirts of Hope, a report documenting blatantly illegal debtors' prisons around the state. ^ James v. Strange, 407 U.S. 128, 130 n.3 (1972) (emphasis added) (quoting Kan. Stat. Donations from readers like you are essential to sustaining this work. Additionally, the Supreme Court of Missouri recently amended its rules to require municipal judges to push back deadlines or allow installment plans for debtors who couldnt pay court costs, fines, and fees. art. . . For example, violations of municipal ordinances boil down to the regulatory crimes category in states where municipalities are not empowered to imprison. Krueger v. Stone, 188 So. VI, 15; Tenn. Const. ^ See Class Action Complaint, Fant v. City of Ferguson, No. Imprisonment for Debt | NCpedia ^ See, e.g., State ex rel. 691, 691 (Iowa 1894). The late Professor William J. Stuntz also noted that regulatory crimes and core crimes like murder have dramatically different histories. Stuntz, supra, at 512. milestone in the process of abolitionin the state of New York and throughout the United States. During the 20th century, on three separate occasions, the Supreme Court affirmed the unconstitutionality of incarcerating those too poor to repay debt. Many Californians do not have valid drivers licenses because they cannot afford to pay the exorbitant fines and fees associated with a routine traffic citation. A century and a half later, in 1983, the Supreme Court affirmed that incarcerating indigent debtors was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendments Equal Protection clause. . It shows that poor defendants are being jailed at increasingly alarming rates for failing to pay legal debts, creating a racially-skewed, two-tiered system of justice that violates the basic constitutional rights of poor people. ^ See supra notes 7590 and accompanying text. 18; Md. I, 21 (No person shall be imprisoned for debt arising out of or founded on contract, express or implied, except in cases of fraud or breach of trust.); In re Sanborn, 52 F. 583, 584 (N.D. Cal. See Act of May 5, 2015, 2015 Ga. Laws 422. c. 62) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland that aimed to reform the powers of courts to detain debtors . Between 1821 and 1849, twelve states followed suit. PDF New American Debtors' Prisons - Harvard University ^ See id. I, 15; Ohio Const. a failure to pay a debt, but . Bearden and imprisonment-for-debt claims could operate side-by-side in a manner thats both administrable and functionally appealing. Second, costs. . 1706, 172729 (2015). In 2011, the ACLU and the ACLU of Michiganfiled lawsuits challenging "pay or stay" sentencesimposed onfive peoplewho were jailed by Michigan courts for being too poor to pay court fines. Const. See . The complaint, Kennedy v. City of Biloxi, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi in Gulfport and cites violations of the U.S. Constitution's Fourth and 14th Amendments. Read more. at 57 (Douglas, J., concurring in the judgment). References: George Philip Bauer, "The Movement against Imprisonment for Debt in the United States" (Ph.D. See id. ^ See Class Action Complaint at 13, Bell v. City of Jackson, No. Underlying the debts is a range of crimes, violations, and infractions, including shoplifting, domestic violence, prostitution, and traffic violations.27 The monetary obligations come under a mix of labels, including fines, fees, costs, and interest, and are generally imposed either at sentencing or as a condition of parole.28 Arrest warrants are sometimes issued when debtors fail to appear in court to account for their debts, but courts often fail to give debtors notice of summons, and many debtors avoid the courts out of fear of imprisonment.29 When courts have actually held the ability-to-pay hearings required by Bearden30 and theyve often neglected to do so31 such hearings have been extremely short, as many misdemeanor cases are disposed of in a matter of minutes.32 Debtors are almost never provided with legal counsel.33 The total amount due fluctuates with payments and added fees, sometimes wildly, and debtors are often unaware at any given point of the amount they need to pay to avoid incarceration or to be released from jail.34 Multiple municipalities have allowed debtors to pay down their debts by laboring as janitors or on a penal farm.35 One Alabama judge credited debtors $100 for giving blood.36, The problem is widespread. 1915); Gooch v. Stephenson, 15 Me. Her crime was a failure to pay the monthly fees mailed to her by a private probation company, called Judicial Correction Services. ACLU Statement for U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Hearing on Municipal Policing and Courts: A Search for Justice or a Quest for Revenue. Though poverty has increased in Lexington County since 2012with poverty rates for Black and Latino residents at more than double the rate for white residentsthe County continues to rely on revenue from fines and fees in magistrate court cases. See Richard E. James, Putting Fear Back into the Law and Debtors Back into Prison: Reforming the Debtors Prison System, 42 Washburn L.J. . ^ Id. . (quoting lawyer Alec Karakatsanis)); The New Debtors Prisons, The Economist (Nov. 16, 2013), http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21589903-if-you-are-poor-dont-get-caught-speeding-new-debtors-prisons [http://perma.cc/5M9N-74HT]. art. Ct. 1834); Werdenbaugh v. Reid, 20 W. Va. 588, 593, 598 (1882) (discussing Virginia and West Virginia). A century and a half later, in 1983, the Supreme Court affirmed that incarcerating indigent debtors was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection clause. The result is one of the most draconian debtors prisons uncovered by the ACLU since 2010. II, 40(3), para. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1, 10506 (1973) (Marshall, J., dissenting); Johnson v. Bredesen, 624 F.3d 742, 749 (6th Cir. When dealing with costs, the states may adopt the reasoning of Strattman in their interpretations of state law, or the Fourteenth Amendment, under James and Fuller, may itself demand that reasoning. This provision is a marked improvement in light of the trend of legislative enactments, starting in 2005, that made many fines for criminal offenses non-waivable, even when an individual could prove inability to pay. Stat. Const. art. On this understanding of the law, debtor protections co-vary quite straightforwardly with the states interest in collecting. See id. 227, 234 (2013). While the contemporary discussion on criminal justice debt often makes cursory reference to this historic abolition of debtors prisons,25 the legal literature contains no sustained analysis of whether the state bans on debtors prisons might invalidate some of whats going on today. Read more. And in the face of mounting budget deficits at the state and local level, courts across the country have used aggressive tactics to collect these unpaid fines and fees, including for traffic offenses and other low-level offenses. But the spirit behind them ought to drive other constitutional actors executives, legislators, and citizens to take swift action.167. II, 13; Or. I, 21; Minn. Const. ACLU affiliates across the country have launched campaigns exposing courts that illegally and improperly jail people too poor to pay criminal justice debt, and seeking reform through public education, advocacy, and litigation. at 65 (Washington). at 48 n.9 (majority opinion). You can also contribute via. ^ See, e.g., Fla. Stat. ^ Id. The Court also likened the classification to the invidious discrimination of Rinaldi v. Yeager, 384 U.S. 305 (1966). at 367. III, 38; Mich. Const. A Constitutional History of Debtors' Prisons So, in 1833, Congress abolished the practice under federal law. Ending Modern-Day Debtors' Prisons Nearly two centuries ago, the United States formally abolished the incarceration of people who failed to pay off debts. It may leave too much discretion in the hands of the same legal actors responsible for the state of play. . Yet, recent years have witnessed the rise of modern-day debtors' prisonsthe arrest and jailing of poor people for failure to pay legal debts they can never hope to afford, through criminal justice procedures that violate their most basic rights. art. 853, 855 (1973). ^ Complaint, Cleveland v. Montgomery, supra note 14, at 4. 129, 130 (1838); Appleton v. Hopkins, 71 Mass. 1971)). The legal revolution which has brought federal law to the fore must not be allowed to inhibit the independent protective force of state law for without it, the full realization of our liberties cannot be guaranteed.). What is the history of debtors prisons in the United States? . This report details the findings of an almost year-long investigation into the ways Nebraskas criminal justice system handles fines and fees imposed on low-income Nebraskans. at 15556 (discussing child support payments); id. State and local courts have increasingly attempted to supplement their funding by charging fees to people convicted of crimes, including fees for public defenders, prosecutors, court administration, jail operation, and probation supervision. Leaving traditional fines and restitution outside the scope of the state bans, this proposal would nonetheless engage with the most problematic types of criminal justice debt. Ending Debtors' Prisons | ACLU of North Carolina Indeed, costs function more as fees for service or taxes than as punishments. 2014) (Liability on a claim; a specific sum of money due by agreement or otherwise. The city of Montgomery settled in 2014, agreeing to conduct the constitutionally required hearings, produce audio recordings,55 provide public defenders, and adopt a presumption of indigence for defendants at or below 125% of the federal poverty level.56 In Ohio, Chief Justice Maureen OConnor took rapid action, issuing guidance materials to clarify the procedures trial and municipal judges should take before imprisoning debtors for failure to pay.57 The Supreme Court of Washington confirmed in March 2015 that the sentencing judge must make an individualized inquiry into the defendants current and future ability to pay before the court imposes [criminal justice debt].58 And in August 2015, Ferguson Municipal Judge Donald McCullin withdrew almost 10,000 arrest warrants issued before 2015.59 As for legislatures, in 2014, the Colorado General Assembly almost unanimously passed a bill requiring courts to make ability-to-pay determinations on the record before imprisoning debtors for nonpayment of debt.60 And in 2015, both the Georgia61 and Missouri62 legislatures passed laws addressing the issue. ^ Indeed, when trying to determine whether or not to read a scienter requirement into a statute, courts are guided by principles like those laid out in Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246 (1952), looking to any required culpable mental state, the purpose of the statute, its connection to common law, whether or not it is regulatory in nature, whether it would be difficult to enforce with a scienter requirement, and whether the sanction is severe. 1951) (citing In re Clifts Estate, 159 P.2d at 876), and Oklahoma, see Sommer v. Sommer, 947 P.2d 512, 519 (Okla. 1997); Lepak, 844 P.2d at 855. The system now issues more than a thousand warrants each year to order the arrest and immediate incarceration of people who owe court fines and fees unless they pay the full amount of their debts before being booked in jail. Indeed, in People ex rel. Sometimes called legal financial obligations (LFOs), the total debt generally includes a mix of fines, fees, court costs, and interest.5 And unlike civil collection actions (for the most part6), incarceration is very much on the menu of sanctions that the unpaid creditor, usually a municipality,7 can impose.
Carolyn Culley David Culley, Arsenal Autograph Request, Tony Brown Maverick City, Articles T