Opinion: Defend bail now or face more chaos on our streets

A proposed Washington court rule would cap bail for most misdemeanors and allow defendants to bypass bondsmen, raising concerns about accountability and public safety.

Nancy Churchill discusses protecting public safety in Washington state

Nancy Churchill
Dangerous Rhetoric

If you are like most law-abiding Washingtonians, you have probably never been to jail and may never have given much thought to how bail works or why it exists. Yet bail is a vital safeguard in our justice system. It allows judges to impose reasonable conditions of release while ensuring defendants return to court to face justice.

Unfortunately, that safeguard is now under threat. A coalition of public defenders from King and Snohomish Counties has proposed changes to the court rules that would dramatically weaken judges’ ability to set effective bail. The good news is that the Washington State Supreme Court has opened a public comment period through April 30, giving citizens a chance to push back. Before we examine the dangerous details of this proposal, it is important to understand how bail currently operates in our state.

How bail works in Washington state

In Washington state, bail serves as a critical tool to balance the presumption of innocence with the need for defendants to return to court and face justice. When a judge sets bail after an arrest, defendants typically work with private bail bondsmen to secure release. The bondsman posts the full bail amount with the court, known as a bond. In exchange, the defendant pays the bondsman a non-refundable fee, usually 10 percent of the total, plus collateral such as property, cash or family guarantees.

Bondsmen scrutinize defendants carefully, confirming reliable community connections or family ties. They also actively monitor the defendants after release to ensure court appearances. If the defendant skips court, the bondsman forfeits the bond and pursues the fugitive, acting as a form of insurance that protects taxpayers and the justice system. This private oversight provides real accountability that government alone cannot easily replicate.

Court rules and the proposed bail modification

Washington’s court rules, specifically CrR 3.2 for superior courts and CrRLJ 3.2 for limited jurisdiction courts, currently provide judges across the state with critical flexibility to set bail when there is risk a defendant will fail to appear. These rules allow judges to require full cash bail or a surety bond through private bondsmen to protect the integrity of the justice system.

A group of public defenders from King and Snohomish Counties has proposed a sweeping modification that would dramatically weaken this authority. The change would replace the practical “likely failure to appear” standard with a narrow “high likelihood of willful flight from prosecution,” a much higher bar that demands proof of intentional efforts to evade justice. Judges would generally be REQUIRED to give defendants at least one free pass to appear out-of-custody before imposing bail on flight grounds.

For most misdemeanors, bail would be capped at just 200 dollars when based on the flight risk. This would nearly eliminate financial consequences and bondsman oversight for repeat thefts, assaults, disorderly conduct, trespass, and reckless driving offenses. Only domestic violence and DUI would be excluded.

Threats to public safety and repeat offender risks

Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney Mary Robnett rightly calls the proposed rule change “ridiculous” and “contrary to making the court system work.”. The proposal would let defendants post just 10 percent of their bail directly to the court, bypassing private bondsmen entirely.

In a state where many already feel crime and public safety are “out of control” and “the courts aren’t working anymore,” this change would weaken judges’ tools and make it far easier for defendants, especially repeat offenders, to simply walk away without meaningful consequences.

Pretrial incarceration has skyrocketed since 1978, yet the real crisis is making sure dangerous or flight-prone individuals actually show up for trial.

Elimination of real accountability from private bail bondsmen

The current system works because private bail bondsmen have skin in the game. They require collateral, conduct vetting that often involves family support, and have strong incentives to ensure defendants return to court.

Most alarmingly, the proposal creates a strong presumption that defendants can post only 10 percent of the bail amount directly to the court clerk as a refundable deposit, effectively sidelining private bail bondsmen and stripping away real financial skin in the game. This shifts the system toward easier, cheaper release for defendants while undermining proven accountability measures.

This proposal also creates a major headache for county clerks, who currently have no system in place to handle these partial bail payments or to effectively collect forfeitures when defendants skip court.

Courtney Wimer, president of the Washington State Bail Agents Association and a 16-year bondsman, explains that the proposal would “take away any accountability or someone’s incentive to return back to court.” Without bondsmen monitoring defendants and pursuing those who flee, the burden shifts to already understaffed police departments chasing more warrants.

This is not reform. It is the removal of a proven private-sector safeguard that has long helped guarantee court appearances.

Erosion of public trust and the false “equity” narrative

Public defenders from King and Snohomish Counties frame this as fixing “wealth-based pretrial incarceration,” but prosecutors, including from King County, argue the supporting data is cherry-picked from other states.

This push is not truly about fairness. It prioritizes releasing defendants over ensuring justice for victims and law-abiding citizens.

By undermining the bail system at a time when confidence in Washington courts is already declining, the rule change risks further eroding public trust. Safety and accountability should never be sacrificed on the altar of simplistic equity arguments.

Citizens in my community tell me they are fed up with a broken justice system that already operates like a revolving door, releasing repeat offenders back onto our streets to commit more petty crimes. This reckless proposal would make the problem far worse by gutting real accountability and turning our courts into an even weaker joke.

Take action: Make your voice heard

The proposed bail rule change threatens public safety by weakening accountability and making it easier for repeat offenders to skip court. The public comment period is open through April 30.

I urge you to submit comments to supreme@courts.wa.gov and tell the Washington State Supreme Court to reject this reckless proposal. Not sure what to say? Review other submitted comments at this link. They range from simple to formal and clearly show why this change must be stopped.

Washingtonians deserve a justice system that puts law-abiding citizens first. This dangerous rule weakens accountability, rewards flight, and puts victims last. If you care about public safety, do not stay silent. Send a strong message to the justices: “Reject this proposal.”

Your voice matters, but only if you use it. Speak up for public safety now, before it’s too late.

Nancy Churchill is a writer, educator, and conservative activist in rural eastern Washington state. She chairs the Ferry County Republican Party and advocates for effective citizen influence through Influencing Olympia Effectively. She may be reached at DangerousRhetoric@pm.me. The opinions expressed in Dangerous Rhetoric are her own. Dangerous Rhetoric is available on Substack and X.