NEW YORK CITY — A long-term, quasi-experimental evaluation conducted by the Data Collaborative for Justice (DCJ) has found that New York’s bail reform law, as amended in July 2020, successfully reduced the use of money bail without compromising public safety. The report, Testing the Long-Term Impact of Bail Reform Across New York State: A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation, tracks the effects of the law over a 50-month follow-up period.
According to the DCJ, the study evaluates the impact of the law by separately analyzing the effects of “(1) eliminating bail for most misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies and (2) reducing the empirical use of bail in cases remaining legally eligible for it.”
The bail reform provisions that eliminated the option to set bail or remand for certain charges led to “substantial recidivism reductions in New York City,” according to the DCJ. Over the 50-month follow-up period, the report found that people released under the reform in New York City had significantly lower rates of overall re-arrest (57% vs. 66%), felony re-arrest (33% vs. 40%), and violent felony (VFO) re-arrest (20% vs. 25%).
The DCJ found that in cases where judges were permitted to reduce the use of money bail through options like supervised release, “modest reductions” in some rates of recidivism occurred. This included reduced rates of overall re-arrest (53% vs. 56%) and felony re-arrest (30% vs. 33%). The report concluded, however, that “violent felony re-arrest rates and the average numbers of re-arrests were unaffected.”
The results were “essentially neutral” in the suburban and upstate regions for cases that remained legally eligible for bail. Recidivism outcomes were nearly the same for people released under reform and those in the comparison group, the Data Collaborative for Justice reported. In contrast, the study found that the trend of “high-risk” subgroups was more mixed but generally indicated increases in recidivism.
The DCJ also noted a significant regional contrast in the effects of mandatory release. While New York City saw reductions, the report found that in the suburban and upstate regions, the prohibition of bail and detention resulted in “no effect” across all six outcomes (rates and counts), meaning the mandatory release provision “had no effect in any direction.”
In its summary and conclusions, the Data Collaborative for Justice reiterated that, by reducing reliance on money bail and pretrial detention while maintaining public safety, the current law can be considered a success. This is because pretrial release rates rose without corresponding increases in overall recidivism.
However, the DCJ highlights a key structural constraint in the New York bail statute, noting that evidence of elevated recidivism for the high-risk subgroup “collides with the statute’s non-risk-based structure.” The report explains that New York law is structurally constrained because judges may not directly consider “dangerousness” or risk of reoffending, only the degree of control “necessary to reduce flight risk and assure return to court.”
In sum, the DCJ’s findings show that New York’s bail reform has largely met its intended goals. However, subgroup analyses noted that the outcomes also differed depending on geography. New York City experienced meaningful declines in recidivism, while upstate and suburban regions saw neutral impact.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
Categories: Breaking News Everyday Injustice Tags: Bail Reform Criminal Justice Reform Data Collaborative for Justice New York New York City Public Safety Recidivism