Massachusetts Legal Counsel Fees Make Defendants Pay for Poverty

“If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you.” When I learned this sentence of the Miranda warnings, I understood it to mean that the state is obligated to provide free legal counsel to a defendant who cannot afford to hire a lawyer. But in practice, it most often means, “If you cannot afford private counsel, the state will appoint a public defender on your dime.”

Read More
Ellen Schlick
Equal Justice Under Law Joins Amicus Effort to Protect Social Security Benefits

Social Security benefits are protected from being compelled to satisfy fines and restitution when defendants lack other income. As one Michigan court put it, “labeling the order as one of ‘contempt’ rather than ‘garnishment’ would exalt form over substance and ignore the reality of the circumstances.” The reality of the circumstances in Ms. I’s case is that Ms. I only receives $967 per month in Social Security Disability Insurance to provide for herself and her children... And despite the trial court’s ruling, the law protects Ms. I’s Social Security benefits, livelihood, and freedom.

Read More
Andrew Lee
Exorbitant Pay-to-Stay Debts Follow Incarcerated Individuals Long After Release

Imagine getting released from prison and doing everything “right”: completing probation, completing a young offender bootcamp, completing every term listed on paper, even receiving a handwritten card from the judge telling you he knew you could do it. But then, when you go to apply for your dream job, you find that your time in prison has followed you there. Unbeknownst to you, you owe the state $50 a day for the seven years of your original sentence, even though you were only held for less than a year.

Read More
Jackson Neme
Ripples of Hope

Our team lost at trial in our class-action lawsuit challenging pretrial fees in Ravalli County, Montana. It’s a sentence I hoped I would never write, and one that, as trial prep and trial commenced throughout the last few months, I firmly believed I’d never have to. What began as a lawsuit with a handful of named plaintiffs back in August of 2021 evolved over the course of nearly five years into something bigger than our individual plaintiffs, bigger than Equal Justice Under Law, and bigger than Ravalli County.

Read More
Lily Milwit
Equal Justice Under Law Heads to Trial in Montana Lawsuit Challenging Abusive Pre-Trial Fees

On March 9th, Equal Justice Under Law will be going to trial in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana challenging Ravalli County, Montana’s unconstitutional pretrial supervision fees. We initially filed a lawsuit against Ravalli County, Montana on behalf of a plaintiffs’ class of indigent arrestees, challenging their “Jail Diversion Program,” a division of the County’s Sheriff’s Office. After surviving a motion to dismiss, a judge largely denied the County’s motion for summary judgment, finding material  disputes of fact on five of the plaintiffs’ counts. After more than four years of litigation, the case is going to trial to determine whether Ravalli County violated due process or falsely imprisoned indigent individuals in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and Montana state law. 

Read More
Jackson Neme
The Untold Costs of Booking Fees

Equal Justice Under Law has recently entered the fight against booking fees. On January 22, 2026, we filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin challenging the constitutionality of the booking fees imposed by Jefferson County, Wisconsin. There, county officials impose a booking fee of nearly $30 on those arrested on suspicion of violating their parole. Those arrested on suspicion of committing a non-parole-related offense are not charged a booking fee. These fees are imposed irrespective of ability to pay, prior to any opportunity to be heard in court, and are not refunded if the charges are dropped or the arrestee is later adjudicated not guilty.

Read More
Logan Moore
Bail Is a Process, Not an Outcome

Last month’s executive orders perpetuate confusion about bail that serves nobody.  They claim to be premised on a concern for public safety, but they do not connect the dots because they fail to realize that cash bail is a process, not an outcome. 

Read More
Phil Telfeyan
Presidential Takeover of D.C. is Unlawful and Unjust

On August 11, 2025, President Donald Trump asserted statutory authority to take over the District of Columbia’s police force, send in National Guard troops, and broadly govern D.C. Since then, six states have sent in their National Guard. Though done to make D.C. “safe and beautiful,” it violates D.C. residents’ views on beauty and safety and, even to the extent D.C. self-government is disregarded for the sake of non-residents’ opinions, it is unconstitutional and ineffective.

Read More
Patrick Healy
Lawsuit Filed to End Foster Care Fees in Georgia

Today, Equal Justice Under Law filed a Complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia challenging the state’s unconstitutional foster care fees scheme that charges exorbitant and arbitrary fees to parents living in poverty whose children are in foster care. The lawsuit alleges that Georgia’s Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) removed children from more than 700 families between 2018 and 2022 solely for reasons of poverty, and then turned around and charged parents of those same families unaffordable monthly child support amounts which served to further delay or altogether prevent family reunification.

Read More
Lily Milwit
New Executive Order Will Not End Homelessness in D.C.

The Order took direct aim at unhoused populations on federal land in the District, empowering the Secretary of the Interior to “issue a directive to the National Park Service requiring prompt removal and cleanup of all homeless or vagrant encampments . . . to the maximum extent permitted by law.” 

Read More
Anna Brule