Two women jailed in Atlanta have filed a federal lawsuit against Georgia, challenging a 2024 law that imposes cash bail for minor offenses, arguing it traps low-income people in jail and violates their constitutional rights. The law, signed by Governor Brian Kemp, expands cash bail requirements for 31 misdemeanors, including shoplifting and trespassing, and limits who can post bail for others.
For everyday Georgians, this legal battle highlights how bail policies can deepen poverty and strain families, raising urgent questions about fairness under the Constitution.
A Law That Keeps the Poor Behind Bars
The lawsuit, filed on May 2, 2025, by the ACLU and Southern Center for Human Rights, represents Jane Roe and Mary Moe (pseudonyms), two women detained in Fulton County Jail for minor crimes. Roe, arrested for shoplifting $60 worth of goods, faces a $500 bail she can’t afford, despite supporting her elderly mother. Moe, charged with trespassing, remains jailed on $1,000 bail, unable to care for her children. Both argue the law—SB 63—violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection and due process clauses by punishing poverty.
SB 63 also caps the number of cash bonds individuals or groups, like churches, can post at three per year unless they meet bail bond company requirements. A judge blocked this restriction in 2024 after the Barred Business Foundation sued, citing its harm to charitable bail funds. The law’s defenders, including Republican Sen. Randy Robertson, claim it ensures accountability for repeat offenders, but critics say it buries the poor in debt and jail time, with Black women like Roe and Moe hit hardest.
Fairness Under the Law
The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal protection and due process, barring laws that unfairly discriminate or deprive liberty without just cause. The lawsuit argues SB 63 creates a “wealth-based detention system,” where the poor stay jailed while the wealthy go free, violating equal protection. It also claims the law denies due process by keeping people like Roe and Moe detained without prompt hearings, citing Bearden v. Georgia (1983), which ruled that jailing someone for inability to pay is unconstitutional.
The Eighth Amendment’s ban on excessive bail is another flashpoint. The plaintiffs argue that high bail for minor offenses—$500 for shoplifting, for instance—is disproportionate, especially for those earning Georgia’s median income of $43,000. For Georgians, this raises a broader issue: if bail systems favor the rich, they undermine the Constitution’s promise of justice for all, leaving families fractured and communities destabilized.
Justice or Punishment?
The lawsuit poses vital constitutional questions:
- Does SB 63 violate equal protection? By jailing those too poor to pay bail, the law discriminates based on wealth, clashing with the Fourteenth Amendment’s mandate for equal treatment. This could set a precedent for striking down similar bail laws nationwide.
- Is detention without hearings constitutional? The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments require due process, including timely hearings. SB 63’s delays—Roe waited weeks for a hearing—could infringe on this right, trapping people in legal limbo.
- Are bail limits on charities constitutional? The First Amendment protects association and expression, including charitable acts. Capping bail postings by groups like churches could infringe on these rights, despite the 2024 injunction, affecting community efforts to support the jailed.
These questions challenge Georgia’s approach to criminal justice, testing whether the Constitution allows policies that disproportionately harm the poor and marginalized.
Families and Finances in Crisis
For Georgia’s 10 million residents, SB 63’s impact is personal.
The law affects thousands—Fulton County Jail holds over 3,000 pretrial detainees, 70% for misdemeanors, per 2024 data. Women like Roe and Moe, often primary caregivers, face devastating consequences: lost jobs, separated families, and mounting debt. The ACLU notes that Black women, who make up 20% of Georgia’s female population but 60% of its jailed women, are hit hardest, exacerbating racial disparities.
Economically, the law strains communities. Pretrial detention costs Georgia $1 billion annually, per the Southern Center, diverting funds from schools or healthcare. Families lose income—Roe’s retail job paid $12/hour, now gone—while bail bondsmen charge 10% non-refunded fees, sinking low-income households deeper into poverty.
For consumers, this means less economic stability, as jailed breadwinners can’t support local businesses or pay taxes.
The Path Forward
The lawsuit seeks to block SB 63, arguing it’s unconstitutional and harms vulnerable Georgians. A similar challenge in 2018 led to Atlanta reforming its bail system, suggesting potential for change. However, Georgia’s GOP-led legislature defends the law, citing a 15% rise in misdemeanor recidivism from 2020 to 2023. The case, filed in Atlanta’s federal court, could reach the Eleventh Circuit or Supreme Court, especially after recent rulings like Culley v. Marshall (2024) upheld stricter bail procedures.
For now, Roe and Moe remain jailed, their fates tied to a broader struggle. If successful, the lawsuit could reshape bail across Georgia, easing burdens on the poor. If it fails, SB 63 may entrench a system where wealth determines freedom, challenging the Constitution’s promise of equal justice. For Americans, this fight underscores a stark reality: the law can either lift communities or lock them away.
