• About AIA
    • About AIA
    • AIA’s Executive Team
    • Agent Testimonials
  • News
    • Bail Bond Blog
    • Recent Bail Articles
  • Bail Bond Resources
    • Become a Bail Agent
    • Bail Bond FAQs
    • Bail Research Library
    • State by State Bail Directory
    • Upcoming State Association Meetings and Events
  • Other Bonds
  • Contact

Blog

You are here: Home / Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda: Part 1

Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda: Part 1

October 21, 2025Posted by adminin Blog, News

Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda (Part 1 of 4):

The Brennan Center for Justice Report

Propaganda part 1To say that the bail profession has been in the spotlight for the past few months would be an understatement.  As you have probably heard by now, on August 25th, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order to eliminate the use of “cashless” bail in the District of Columbia. Additionally, as part of the Executive Order, Trump ordered the Attorney General, Pam Bondi, and the Department of Justice to review and identify all jurisdictions that currently utilize a cashless bail scheme.

Since that Executive Order, there has been a barrage of articles and studies being released by bail reform activists. Over the next few weeks, we will be reviewing four of these new studies and breaking down the findings.

Our goal? To see if these studies are true or if they are propaganda.

Bail Reform and Public Safety: Evidence from 33 Cities

August 15, 2024

Brennan Center for JusticeThe first study we are going to look at is the Brennan Center for Justice’s “Bail Reform and Public Safety: Evidence from 33 Cities.” This study was released last August and has been one of the studies that has been getting the most attention.

 

The study’s objective:

  • Did reforms that were implemented in US cities during the study period affect crime trends?

The study’s methodology:

  • Use data from dozens of jurisdictions nationwide to test bail reform’s causal impact on crime trends.
  • Compare major offenses from 2015 through 2021 in 22 cities that had in place some type of bail reform with 11 others that did not.
  • Examine the impact of reforms according to whether they were implemented through legislation, court order or changes in prosecutorial policy.
  • Focus on cities where research shows reforms had large effects on how and when bail was set.

 The study’s findings:

  • This model showed no statistically significant difference in crime rates after reform. In other words, they found no evidence that bail reform affected crime rates.
  • This report discredits theories linking bail reform to recent increases in crime. We find no evidence to support such a connection, even after testing different types of reform in jurisdictions across the country.
  • These findings add to a growing body of literature showing that bail reform is an unlikely explanation for recent trends in crime, whether increases or decreases.

These results have made their way through the media. In every article attempting to justify soft on crime and bail reform policies, the Brennan study is quoted as proof that bail reform works and makes our communities safer.

Meanwhile, common sense tells us something different. If you just think about it…releasing accused criminals from jail with no accountability and no skin in the game sounds like a horrible idea. How could it possibly improve public safety? It makes no sense. So, we thought it would be a good idea to really dig into the Brennan report findings. As part of this process, we paid special attention to the footnotes and any comments regarding limitations or challenges. This is what we found.

  • None of the crime data across the 33 states was consistent
    • The first limitation is that none of the crime data gathered from the various jurisdictions was consistent. Researchers had to manually go through the data and adjust it in order to make it consistent enough to compare. In other words, the data was manipulated in different ways. That is a big red flag in our opinion and brings lots of questions and doubts into the legitimacy of the research.
  • If someone had multiple charges, only the highest charge was counted
    • People in the criminal justice system know, many defendants, especially career offenders, rarely have just one charge. They very typically have multiple charges pending. So, if you are taking only one charge to calculate crime numbers, your calculations will be grossly low. That appears to be what happened here.
  • They only considered 6 crimes that they determined to be the worst
    • The researchers did not look at the full spectrum of potential crimes (felonies and misdemeanors). They instead decided to only focus on the 6 crimes they felt were the worst. As you can imagine, narrowing the crimes down to 6 potentially grossly underestimates the actual number of crimes committed.

In addition to the above three limitations, there are some serious questions about the key chart that is used in the report to showcase what the researchers call a drop in crime.

chartAs you can see in the chart with “0” being the implementation point of bail reform, there definitely appears to be a drop in crime, especially early on. But what the researchers don’t point out is that the drop in crime began several months before bail reform was ever implemented (-4 to 0). In fact, the decrease in crime actually slows down after bail reform was implemented.

At about 4 months, crime starts to increase and between 4 months and 12 months, crime goes back up significantly. So, to say that bail reform didn’t lead to an increase in crime is not a legitimate claim.

Lastly, if you look at the gray area on either side of the line representing crime (the findings margin of error) you will notice that it becomes wider as time increases. This means that the margin of error increased substantially over time. Based on this, the reality is that the increase in crime after the implementation of bail reform could actually be more substantial than the black line in the chart indicates. It really makes you wonder how this report could make anyone come to the conclusion that there was no impact to crime after the implementation of bail reform when this chart so clearly shows there was an increase.

We also looked at who was behind the report in terms of its creation and funding. In the Brennan report, special recognition is given to the MacArthur Foundation for their support and help with the research. The MacArthur Foundation is a well-known anti-bail foundation that is committed to ending the use of secured bail. In other words, not the most objective and fair source. Additionally, the MacArthur Foundation is not the only anti-bail organization identified in the report. The footnotes/endnotes in the report read as a who’s who in the anti-bail movement. This includes, but is not limited to, billionaire activist foundations, progressive think tanks and media organizations like the Vera Institute, The Data Collaborative for Justice, The Quattrone Center, The Henry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, Politico and the Brookings Institute.

In conclusion, while the findings in this report are being sold as proof that bail reform works and has no connection to any increase in crime, we believe that they are nothing more than pure progressive, anti-bail propaganda. In our opinion, there are too many issues and shortcomings in this research to consider it legitimate.

 

Comments

comments

Share in social networks

Click here to cancel reply.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent
Popular
Social Justice vs. Criminal Justice: The Need For Balance
Social Justice vs. Criminal Justice: The Need For Balance

One of the most critical aspects of managing any form…

Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda: Part 1
Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda: Part 1

Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda (Part 1 of 4):…

Letter to Colorado House Judiciary Committee Chair
Letter to Colorado House Judiciary Committee Chair

Prior to 2003 I was the Chair of the Colorado…

Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda: Part 1
Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda: Part 1

Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda (Part 1 of 4):…

The Public Responds With an Emphatic “NO” to Cashless Bail
The Public Responds With an Emphatic “NO” to Cashless Bail

The Public States and Emphatic “NO” to Cashless Bail For…

State of Bail in Florida Survey Results 2025
State of Bail in Florida Survey Results 2025

The AIA Surety team recently attended the Florida Bail Agents…

Contact Us

1 Baxter Way, Suite 130, Westlake Village, CA 91362

(800) 935-2245

E-Mail: [email protected]

Twitter: https://twitter.com/BailInsights

Recent Blog Posts

Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda: Part 1
Understanding Bail Reform Research and Propaganda: Part 1
October 21,2025 - 9:19 am

© Copyright 2005-2025 AIA Surety All Rights Reserved | 800.935.2245

  • About AIA
  • Bail Resources
  • Become an Agent
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Security
  • Accessibility
Skip to content
Open toolbar

Accessibility

  • Increase Text
  • Decrease Text
  • Grayscale
  • High Contrast
  • Negative Contrast
  • Light Background
  • Links Underline
  • Readable Font
  • Reset
  • Help