State and local courts sentence millions of Americans to pay fines every year as punishment for an extraordinary range of offenses. On top of that, jurisdictions across the United States increasingly charge exorbitant fees that shift costs of courts and other government functions onto the people who “use” the courts. People are required to pay fees to finance their prosecution, court-ordered drug treatment, probation supervision—and, even their “room and board” during incarceration.

The same monetary sanction that inconveniences an affluent person can prevent a poor family from paying their rent—but fines and fees are usually set without regard to a person’s financial circumstances. When people can’t pay, courts often treat them as refusing to pay—and the penalties are steep. In many states, people will face incarceration, suspension of their drivers’ licenses, the loss of their right to vote, and more. All of this falls disproportionately on individuals who are already struggling to make ends meet. What’s more, many courts face tremendous pressure to raise revenue for local authorities (or, even for their own salaries) by collecting fines and fees. That creates a perverse incentive to extract money rather assure justice.

NCAJ’s Fines and Fees Justice Index sheds light on a complex empirical picture by measuring key laws and practices of every US state against a set of principled policy benchmarks we think all states should strive for. You can explore our findings in detail using our data visualizations, here. For detailed information about our policy benchmarks, our reasons for choosing them, and the approach we took in identifying them, read our comprehensive project overview or our national report in the Federal Sentencing Reporter. Our ongoing activities and products in support of the movement to curb unjust fines and fees practices is set forth below.

Our Reports, Briefs, Videos, and More

File
Description
NCAJ examines ways in which state courts are determining whether people have the "ability to pay" government-imposed "fines and fees". The report identifies ten policy models and more than 30 examples of laws and practices that are established in one or more states. In doing so, it provides a knowledge base for next level evaluative research and potential replication. Some of the ideas and models set forth in the report will also have potential application in additional areas of law that include child support, restitution, and consumer debt collection.
NCAJ filed this brief as lead amicus in Rosa v. Doe on behalf of nine amici organizations including the ACLUs of Connecticut and Vermont, urging the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to guide federal district courts on how to ensure that when people in state prison commence federal civil actions, the federal court filing fee will not force them to choose between paying their “necessary expenses” (including for family members) and vindicating their rights.
This report finds that if New York passes the End Predatory Court Fees Act (2022) it would become first in the nation on the Fines and Fees Justice Index. Among other provisions, the bill would 1) end all mandatory surcharges as well as all parole and probation fees, 2) ensure that judges assess a person's inability to pay, and return to judges the discretion to waive or modify fines if a person is unable to pay, 3) end incarceration as a punishment for failure to pay fines and fees, and 4) end the garnishment of commissary to pay fines and fees.
This report provides a detailed description of NCAJ's Fines and Fees Indexing Project. It covers our guiding principles and methodology, and offers a detailed overview of our policy benchmarks and why they were chosen. It also provides a description and analysis of our research findings.