Can California Supreme Court strike the right balance on bail?

Bail is one part of California’s justice system that has vexed judges, lawmakers and voters alike for years. 

In 2020, the bail bond industry spent millions to successfully persuade voters to overturn a law that did away with cash bail.

One result: Californians spend months, sometimes years, behind bars without being convicted of anything while awaiting trial, as CalMatters reported in 2021.

Now, the state’s highest court will soon hear a case that once again spotlights what the goal of bail should be, and whether it is constitutional for judges to set bail amounts that far exceed what defendants can pay, explains CalMatters justice reporter Nigel Duara.

In 2021, Gerald Kowalczyk purchased a $7 cheeseburger in San Mateo with a credit card he told police that he found. He was homeless and unemployed, but when he was charged with theft, a San Mateo Superior Court judge set his bail at $75,000.

Unable to pay, Kowalczyk spent six months behind bars. He then pled guilty before being released, but his case has been making its way through the courts. Last year, the California Supreme Court agreed to hear it.

Kowalczyk’s supporters argue that not only does a previous ruling from the high court already prohibits judges from setting unaffordable bail amounts (unless the defendants are a danger to the public or unlikely to show up for court), but also that the state constitution directs judges to prioritize “public safety and the safety of the victim” when setting bail amounts.

Because Kowalczyk did not pose a threat, his exorbitant bail failed its purpose to make the public any safer, says David Ball, a Santa Clara University law professor who co-authored an amicus brief supporting Kowalczyk.

Ball: “This guy was trying to buy a hamburger. There’s no horror movie that’s ever been made about the guy who bought a hamburger with somebody else’s credit card.” 

But bail isn’t always about protecting the public, others say. Greg Totten, the chief executive officer of the California District Attorneys Association, argues that it can also be used to ensure defendants show up to court. 

Totten, in an amicus brief: Eliminating the financial aspect of bail “makes the criminal justice system the proverbial revolving door and undermines the entire voter-approved purposes of the body of laws governing pretrial detention and bail in this state.”

For more on the case, read Nigel’s story.

The list of ballot measures that California voters will decide in November keeps shrinking.

Tuesday, a high-profile initiative that would have required public schools to notify parents if their children identify as transgender missed the deadline to submit enough signatures to qualify. The measure would have also banned female transgender students from girls’ sports teams and prohibited children from seeking gender-affirming health care.

Protect Kids California, the group behind the measure, blamed some common reasons: Lack of money and time, worsened by an unfavorable title. It proposed the “Protect Kids of California Act,” but Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office changed it to “Restricts Rights of Transgender Youth.”

In a statement, the organization said it raised nearly $200,000 and collected more than 400,000 signatures, mostly from Los Angeles, Orange and Riverside counties. But it needed at least 546,651 to get on the ballot. The group promises to continue its efforts, and is opposing a bill introduced by the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus last week that would ban school districts statewide from imposing what the caucus says are “forced outing” policies.

Protect Kids California: “While we are disappointed we didn’t meet the threshold to qualify for the ballot, we are encouraged by the amount of support from every sector of the state. We gathered more signatures for a statewide initiative than any all-volunteer effort in the history of California.”

Friday, a lesser-known measure to limit private parties from using the California Environmental Quality Act to block or slow new housing development also failed to turn in enough signatures. The measure would have also capped impact fees local and state agencies could impose on housing developers.

That means a month before the June 27 deadline, 12 measures are on the Nov. 5 ballot but 15 have been withdrawn or failed to qualify.

More than a week after 2,000 student workers at UC Santa Cruz went on strike, 12,000 more at two University of California campuses joined the labor stoppage, writes CalMatters higher education reporter Mikhail Zinshteyn. 

On Tuesday, UCLA and UC Davis graduate student workers, including teaching assistants, academic researchers and graders, walked off the job in response to the university’s deployment of police to sweep pro-Palestinian encampments earlier this month, as well as the arrests and campus suspensions of protestors. The 48,000-member union, UAW 4811, is also calling for the UC to pardon those who were arrested or face university discipline.

The UC’s Office of the President says the strike is illegal, violating a 2022 labor agreement that included a no-strike rule. But the union disagrees, arguing that there is a legal precedent for it to strike, and that the university violated its employee rights when it summoned police.

Read more about the strike in Mikhail’s story.

Speaking of higher education: Haydee Barahona of CalMatters’ College Journalism Network dives into a federal grant program that helps fund resources and opportunities for Latino students attending Hispanic Serving Institutions. California is home to 172 Hispanic Serving colleges and universities, which have received $637 million since 1995. 

But with 900,000 Hispanic undergraduates in California in 2022-23, experts are urging schools to create programs that can survive beyond federal grants to more meaningfully serve Latino students. 

That includes Marisol Ruiz, a program coordinator for PromotorX Transformative Educators at Cal Poly Humboldt. Ruiz, who is also a tenured professor, helps train students of color to be teachers. As the program nears the end of its five-year grant, she said the program may have to become smaller.

Ruiz: “We can create nice positions, but who’s doing the work, and are we going to continue that work?”

Learn more about the grant program in Haydee’s story.