Study Reveals Judges with Law Enforcement Backing Detain More and Set Higher Bail Than Peers Without Police Experience.
A new study analyzing nearly 70,000 New York City criminal court arraignments has found that judges who previously worked as prosecutors or police officers are more likely to detain people following their first court appearances and to set higher bail than judges without a law enforcement background.
According to the research, judges with law enforcement backgrounds were about four percentage points more likely to order detention than those without such backgrounds. Furthermore, when these judges set cash bail, the amounts were roughly one-third higher on average.
The study’s authors estimate that replacing one judge with a law enforcement background would result in 65 fewer detentions and $6 million less in imposed cash bail over a typical ten-year term. This translates to approximately 17 years of jail time avoided, which would save taxpayers about $8.7 million in detention costs.
While the study did not find statistically significant differences among judges who had legal services or public defense backgrounds, it does have broad relevance for efforts to reduce jail populations.
Oded Oren, co-author of the paper, stated that having this kind of information is important and useful as people come to discussions about crime and public safety from different backgrounds and with different ideas.
However, the study has its limitations, as it cannot say for certain whether a judge's past job is the reason for their decisions. The data also cannot untangle whether individuals who are already more inclined towards detention become prosecutors or if that experience shapes their views once they're on the bench.
Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s advisory committee on the judiciary, which screens and recommends most of the city's Criminal Court and Family Court judges, has been taking steps to increase transparency and professional diversity. The committee now includes public defenders, attorneys who represent parents and children in family court, and those working in indigent legal services in its selection process.
While these changes are a step forward, Oren argues that more needs to be done to ensure accountability and openness in the judicial appointment process.
A new study analyzing nearly 70,000 New York City criminal court arraignments has found that judges who previously worked as prosecutors or police officers are more likely to detain people following their first court appearances and to set higher bail than judges without a law enforcement background.
According to the research, judges with law enforcement backgrounds were about four percentage points more likely to order detention than those without such backgrounds. Furthermore, when these judges set cash bail, the amounts were roughly one-third higher on average.
The study’s authors estimate that replacing one judge with a law enforcement background would result in 65 fewer detentions and $6 million less in imposed cash bail over a typical ten-year term. This translates to approximately 17 years of jail time avoided, which would save taxpayers about $8.7 million in detention costs.
While the study did not find statistically significant differences among judges who had legal services or public defense backgrounds, it does have broad relevance for efforts to reduce jail populations.
Oded Oren, co-author of the paper, stated that having this kind of information is important and useful as people come to discussions about crime and public safety from different backgrounds and with different ideas.
However, the study has its limitations, as it cannot say for certain whether a judge's past job is the reason for their decisions. The data also cannot untangle whether individuals who are already more inclined towards detention become prosecutors or if that experience shapes their views once they're on the bench.
Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s advisory committee on the judiciary, which screens and recommends most of the city's Criminal Court and Family Court judges, has been taking steps to increase transparency and professional diversity. The committee now includes public defenders, attorneys who represent parents and children in family court, and those working in indigent legal services in its selection process.
While these changes are a step forward, Oren argues that more needs to be done to ensure accountability and openness in the judicial appointment process.
. It's like you're already guilty until proven innocent, you know? And it's not just the detention and bail that's the problem, it's the whole system that's supposed to be about fairness and justice but feels more like punishment and profit 
.
. We need more than just changes in the system, we need hearts and minds that care 
.
. i mean think about it, if you're already gonna become a judge, why not have some experience on the other side of law enforcement? it's like having a leg up on your peers 
. but at the same time, its kinda fishy that they can say with certainty that law enforcement background is the reason for these differences in detention rates 
.
. like, having public defenders and indigent legal services reps on board is a great move 
. now they just need to make sure these changes are enforced properly 
.
. thats some serious cash right there 
. maybe its time for us to start thinking about the impact of our judges' backgrounds on our communities more critically 
.
. Back in the day, you'd actually see a police officer or prosecutor behind the bench before you got locked up. Nowadays, it seems like judges are still making decisions with that law enforcement background, and it's affecting how people get treated in court. The stats on bail amounts are wild too - one-third more? That's like going from a budget flight to first class 
️.
.
. Overall, it's a reminder that our justice system should be serving everyone equally, not just those with connections or experience.
. The study shows that they just happen to make decisions based on their past experience. I mean, who wouldn't want to use their expertise to help keep the community safe? And as for the bail amounts, it's not like judges are trying to be unfair or anything. They're just setting amounts based on what's reasonable and necessary 
.
. It's all about accountability and ensuring that everyone is held to high standards 
.
. We can't just assume that a judge's past experience determines their decisions in the courtroom. There are so many other factors at play 
