From the President: Serious Concerns About The Bail Project and Public Safety.

I write to raise serious concerns about The Bail Project’s practices, especially its policy
of posting bail without properly considering an individual’s criminal record, previous
failures to appear, or demonstrated risk to the community.

The Bail Project uses a uniform bail approach that treats all defendants similarly,
regardless of their past conduct. This method ignores important public safety factors,
such as repeat offenses, violent criminal histories, previous bond revocations, and
documented patterns of not complying with court orders.

Criminal history plays a crucial role in the justice system by giving courts and law
enforcement vital information to evaluate risk and set suitable conditions for release.
Overlooking this information weakens the core purpose of bail, which is not
punitive but to ensure accountability—making sure a defendant appears in court and
protecting the community. When bail is granted without proper scrutiny, individuals with
serious or dangerous criminal records might be released on the same terms as first-
time, low-risk offenders, leading to unnecessary and avoidable threats to public safety.
These risks are further worsened by the actions of activist judges who, in coordination
with or deference to organizations like The Bail Project, approve the release of repeat
offenders with little or no meaningful incentive to appear in court. By reducing or
removing financial consequences, these decisions eliminate a vital mechanism that
promotes compliance with court obligations and reinforces accountability in the pretrial
process.

Unlike professional bail agents, who operate under strict regulatory oversight and
assume direct financial and legal responsibility for ensuring court appearances and
compliance, The Bail Project does not have a comparable level of accountability when a
defendant fails to appear, reoffends, or causes harm after release. The consequences
are borne by victims, law enforcement agencies, and taxpayers—not the organization
posting the bail.

I further urge every state to adopt legislation similar to the proposed Florida legislation,
which mandates that all cash bonds be posted in the defendant’s name and that any
remission or return of a cash bond be made directly to the defendant. This safeguard
prevents third-party organizations from financially benefiting from the bail process,
reinforces personal responsibility, and maintains the integrity of the judicial system.

Public safety, victim rights, and judicial integrity rely on individualized assessments
rather than one-size-fits-all policies driven by ideology. Any bail practice that deliberately
ignores criminal history—and any judicial action that enables such practices—fails to
balance compassion with responsibility and ultimately damages public trust in the
justice system.
For these reasons, The Bail Project’s refusal to consider criminal history, along with
judicial decisions that support the release of repeat offenders without meaningful
incentives to appear, is incompatible with a fair, responsible, and safe pretrial process.

Respectfully,
Cary Carlisle
President, Florida Bail Agents Association

Related coverage:
For a recent example of the public-safety consequences at issue, see this report:
Repeat offender allegedly kills Ohio man just days after nonprofit pays his bail (Fox News, external link – opens in a new tab).