SPRINGFIELD, Ailing. – The Illinois Supreme Courtroom will hear arguments subsequent month on whether or not the far-reaching SAFE-T Act and its elimination of money bail is unconstitutional, as a Kankakee choose dominated the top of final 12 months.

The court docket set a date of March 14 because the Illinois lawyer basic’s workplace filed a movement Monday urging the court docket to reject the “grab-bag of constitutional theories” raised by the regulation’s opponents.

Kankakee County Chief Decide Thomas Cunnington sided with these opponents simply days earlier than the bail reform provision was to take impact, ruling in favor of a bunch of state’s attorneys and sheriffs who introduced greater than 60 lawsuits difficult points of the regulation.

Cunnington dominated that a part of the act violated a requirement within the state Structure that requires defendants be bailable “by adequate sureties,” apart from sure offenses. He additionally discovered that it violated the separation of powers between the judiciary and Legislature.

“The appropriateness of bail rests with the authority of the court docket and is probably not decided by legislative fiat,” Cunnington wrote in his ruling.

SUBSCRIBE TO FOX 32 ON YOUTUBE

Legislators who wrote the invoice, and reform advocates who assist it, have argued that money bail is inherently unfair and doesn’t profit public security when some defendants accused of crimes are launched forward of trial whereas others are held in jail as a result of they lack the monetary capacity to publish bond.

Opponents of the regulation argue lawmakers violated the state’s structure once they failed to hunt approval from voters by a constitutional modification, and so they say they’d “strongly assist” such a system if the state had executed so.

“This didn’t happen,” opponents argued in a movement earlier than the state Supreme Courtroom earlier this month. “In so doing, the Basic Meeting has illegitimately tried to amend the Illinois Structure.”

In its movement filed Monday, the lawyer basic insisted that the state Structure not does require Illinois to keep up a system of money bail.

“Plaintiffs’ grab-bag of constitutional theories needs to be rejected: None of those constitutional provisions locks in place the establishment of financial bail,” the movement contends.

As an alternative, the movement argues, the state Structure “grants felony defendants a professional proper to hunt pretrial launch.”