Overview

Title

To provide for the reallocation of certain grant funds from jurisdictions that do not allow for consideration the danger, risk, or threat an individual poses to the community when determining bail or pretrial release or that have in effect a policy providing for the sealing of certain criminal records.

ELI5 AI

H.R. 9701 is a proposed law that says if a state doesn't think about whether someone might be dangerous before letting them out of jail, or if they hide bad things adults have done, they might lose some money from the government. This money would then be given to cities in those states instead.

Summary AI

H.R. 9701, known as the "Keep Our Streets Safe Act of 2024," is a bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. It proposes to reallocate certain grant funds away from states that do not allow courts to consider the danger a person poses when deciding on bail or pretrial release. Additionally, it affects states with policies that generally seal the criminal records of adult felons. Under this bill, the U.S. Attorney General would redirect these funds to local governments within those states.

Published

2024-09-19
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2024-09-19
Package ID: BILLS-118hr9701ih

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
425
Pages:
2
Sentences:
5

Language

Nouns: 142
Verbs: 31
Adjectives: 18
Adverbs: 1
Numbers: 14
Entities: 32

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.22
Average Sentence Length:
85.00
Token Entropy:
4.74
Readability (ARI):
44.43

AnalysisAI

Summary of the Bill

The proposed legislation, "Keep Our Streets Safe Act of 2024" (H.R. 9701), aims to reallocate certain grant funds from jurisdictions that do not permit the assessment of an individual's potential threat to the community when determining bail or pretrial release. Furthermore, this bill targets jurisdictions with a policy of sealing certain felony criminal records. The primary mechanism involves amending the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, thus allowing the Attorney General to withhold funds from non-compliant states and redistribute them to local governments within those states.

Significant Issues

Several notable concerns arise from the proposed bill:

  1. Assessment of Threat and Risk: The bill mandates that states consider the danger an individual might pose to society when deciding on pretrial release. However, it does not provide clear guidelines on how this risk assessment should be conducted, potentially leading to varying interpretations and practices across different jurisdictions.

  2. Vague Definition of Policy: The text does not precisely define what constitutes a "general policy" regarding the sealing of criminal records for felons, apart from juveniles. This ambiguity presents a challenge as states might have differing standards for what qualifies as a felony or how records are sealed.

  3. Criteria for Compliance: There is a lack of clarity concerning the criteria or metrics the Attorney General should apply to evaluate state compliance. Without explicit guidelines, there is potential for inconsistency in determining funding eligibility.

  4. Management of Fund Reallocation: The bill provides for the reallocation of funds to local governments, but it does not detail how this reallocation should be managed or monitored. This could lead to discrepancies in how funds are distributed or used.

  5. Consequences for Non-Compliance: While the bill outlines that funds will be withheld from non-compliant states, it does not thoroughly explain the procedures or criteria for this action, potentially causing confusion or misadministration.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

Broadly, the "Keep Our Streets Safe Act of 2024" could have substantial implications for public safety and justice system efficiency. By influencing how pretrial decisions are made, the bill may aim to enhance community safety by ensuring that potentially dangerous individuals are not released without due consideration.

For law enforcement and local governments, the bill could be beneficial by providing additional resources through the reallocated funds, potentially enhancing capacity to address local safety concerns. On the other hand, these entities may face challenges in aligning with the federal requirements for fund eligibility, particularly with ambiguous criteria potentially leading to administrative burdens.

For individuals facing criminal charges, the bill could result in more stringent conditions for pretrial release, potentially impacting their freedom and presumption of innocence. The broad criteria for assessing community danger may raise concerns about fairness and consistency in judicial decisions.

Conclusion

While the bill aims to address community safety, its implementation might necessitate careful consideration and clearer guidelines to avoid inconsistency and ensure that stakeholder needs are adequately met. Policymakers will need to strike a balance between enhancing security and maintaining fair and equitable justice practices.

Issues

  • The bill does not specify how the 'danger, risk, or threat' an individual poses to the community should be assessed, which could lead to inconsistent or subjective application across different states. This issue is related to Section 2, which introduces a requirement for jurisdictions to consider these factors in pretrial release decisions.

  • The term 'general policy providing for the sealing of the criminal records of felons (other than juveniles)' is vague in Section 2. It does not define what constitutes a 'general policy' or which offenses are considered felonies, potentially leading to different interpretations across states.

  • The bill lacks clarity on the metrics or criteria the Attorney General should use to determine whether a state is compliant or non-compliant with the requirements. This issue is significant because it affects how funding decisions are made under Section 2.

  • There is potential ambiguity around how the reallocation of funds to local governments should be managed or monitored under Section 2. This could result in inconsistent distribution or oversight, affecting how the funds are used at the local level.

  • The consequences for non-compliance mentioned in Section 2 are only briefly outlined and lack detail on the process for withholding and reallocating funds. This could lead to confusion or mismanagement in the enforcement of the bill's provisions.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of the bill states that it can be referred to as the “Keep Our Streets Safe Act of 2024.”

2. Requirement for States receiving Byrne grant funds Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The proposed amendment to the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 requires states to allow courts to consider an individual's potential danger to the community when deciding bail or pretrial release. If a state fails to meet this requirement, or if it has a general policy of sealing adult felons' criminal records, the Attorney General will withhold relevant grant funds and redistribute them to local governments within that state.