This year, despite deep political divisions, one area of growing consensus from stakeholders on both sides of the aisle was the need to reform our country’s criminal legal system. 

Implementation of the First Step Act coincided with Democratic presidential candidates making criminal legal reform a cornerstone of their policy platforms — so much so that 14 of the original field of candidates supported a 50 percent decarceration goal. Here at the ACLU, we continued to deepen our commitment to challenging racism in the criminal legal system and getting people out of prison and jail.

The Problem 

The numbers are astonishing. Since 1970, our incarcerated population has increased by 700 percent ­­— more than 2.1 million people are in jail and prison today. Extreme sentences keep more people in jail for longer periods of time, prosecutors have almost unlimited power, and nearly 700,000 people are in jail daily.

In 2019, our Campaign for Smart Justice alone engaged with almost 6,000 volunteers across the country and met directly with more than 2,000 state legislators on legislation aimed at challenging injustice in the criminal legal system. These efforts ultimately helped pass 75 bills in statehouses across the country, translating into thousands fewer people incarcerated.

Here are some highlights from the fight this year:

Sentencing Reform

Mandatory minimum sentences, “three strikes” enhancements, and restrictions on release are a piece of the twisted equation that holds millions of people in jail and prisons far longer than they should be. Scrapping these tough-on-crime laws is key to dismantling the architecture of mass incarceration. 

In Delaware, we played a leading role in an incredibly productive legislative session that saw 11 reform bills passed, including H.B. 5, which restored judges’ power to impose concurrent sentences and eliminated requirements that sentences run consecutively for most crimes. Lawmakers also passed S.B. 47, which eliminated racially discriminatory sentence enhancements for drug possession within 300 feet of schools and parks, and revised drug weight classifications to reflect usage patterns accurately. 

In Missouri, together with the Missouri Sentencing Coalition, we helped pass H.B. 192, which requires the parole board to evaluate those currently serving mandatory minimum sentences and decide if they should be released. After four years, this reform is projected to decrease the state’s prison population by 925 people.

In Oklahoma, alongside Oklahomans for Criminal Justice Reform, we succeeded in passing HB1269, a compromise measure aimed at making our 2016 drug and property reclassification ballot initiative retroactive. This law ultimately led to Governor Stitt approving the release of 527 people through commutation, the largest single-day commutation in U.S. history.

Prosecutorial Reform 

Voters are increasingly recognizing the power that prosecutors hold as gatekeepers of mass incarceration. To address the disproportionate power that prosecutors wield, this year in Connecticut, we led the effort to pass S.B. 880, a first-of-its-kind law that would create the most comprehensive transparency requirements for prosecutors anywhere in the country. Our campaign was led by formerly incarcerated people and focused on centering directly impacted populations.

S.B. 880 requires prosecutors’ offices to collect and share data on charges, diversionary programs, bail requests, plea deals, contact with victims, sentencing recommendations, demographic information, and more. 

In Louisiana, our work this session included passage of S.B. 146, a landmark bill to limit prosecutors’ practice of unjustly jailing sexual assault and domestic violence victims using material witness warrants. This victory built off of our lawsuit in 2017 challenging Orleans Parish District Attorney Leon Cannizzaro’s use of fraudulent subpoenas to jail witnesses of crimes.

This progress continued with passage of Oregon’s H.B. 3224, which requires every district attorney to create policies for the core functions of their office and make them available to the public.

Bail Reform

In 2019, we fought to end wealth-based incarceration and pass bail reform in more than 30 states. One highlight took place in Colorado, where together with partners we successfully advocated for H.B. 1225, which eliminates cash bail for petty and low-level offenses, and S.B. 91, which mandates quick release once bond is posted and eliminates fees assessed against the bond amount.

Re-Entry 

Incarceration often prevents people from accessing jobs, housing, and educational opportunities long after serving time in prison or jail.

In August of this year, the ACLU of Kentucky and its partners in the Smart on Crime coalition celebrated the passage of S.B. 57, a bill that expanded expungement opportunities for an important category of felony offenses.

The ACLU of New Mexico’s Smart Justice Campaign led the advocacy campaign with its partners in the New Mexico SAFE coalition for passage of a package of criminal legal reform bills, including legislation to “Ban the Box” and expand expungement opportunities for an array of offenses. 

The deeply entrenched systems that we confronted this year not only destroy lives; they ultimately do not make communities safer and increase the likelihood that people return to prison.

Dismantling the labyrinth of racist policies that make up the criminal legal system is no easy task, and much work remains to be done in 2020 and beyond. But the ACLU’s work to advance justice, expand freedom, and fight racism continues to grow, deepen, and win significant legislative victories throughout the country.

Part of an end of year wrap-up series. Read more:

Under Attack by Trump, Immigrant Justice is Advancing in the States

Ari Rosmarin, Deputy Director, ACLU Campaign for Smart Justice

On Friday, Congressman Chris Stewart (R-Utah) and several of his Republican colleagues in the House of Representatives introduced the so-called “Fairness for All Act.” The bill is being described by its supporters as a compromise that protects both LGBTQ people and religious liberty.

In reality, the bill facilitates the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to give a greenlight to those who would turn LGBTQ people away from jobs, health care, housing, even taxpayer-funded programs, simply because of who they are. The bill also weakens some longstanding protections in federal and state laws for everyone, not just LGBTQ people.

Creates a Different Standard for Anti-LGBTQ Discrimination

By singling out LGBTQ people for lesser protections than other characteristics under federal law – such as race, ethnicity, and religion – the new legislation signals that LGBTQ people are less worthy of protection. It does this by providing religious organizations and service providers with the ability to discriminate based on sexual orientation and gender identity where they are explicitly prohibited under current federal law from discriminating based on other protected characteristics.

Grants a License to Discriminate in Child Welfare

One of the most dangerous aspects of the new legislation is its proposal to upend the child welfare system to allow for sweeping taxpayer-funded discrimination. It would do this through the creation of a new voucher system whose sole purpose is to allow religiously-affiliated child welfare providers – with whom the government contracts with to find stable, loving homes for children who are in state care – to discriminate against LGBTQ people or those, such as Jewish parents or single parents, who do not meet the agency’s religious criteria.

In places where the only providers work exclusively with conservative Christians, children of minority faiths – such as those who are Muslim or Jewish – or those who are LGBTQ would only be placed with parents who would be free to refuse to respect the identities of the children in their care.

Undermines Existing Protections from the Courts

Within the next seven months, the Supreme Court is poised to rule in a trio of cases concerning the existing rights of LGBTQ people under federal law. This new bill would undermine a potentially favorable ruling in those cases by authorizing discrimination in many contexts where it would be prohibited under existing law.

Proponents of this bill claim that it will somehow result in less litigation. They claim that by allowing discrimination by people of faith in many contexts, it will somehow end court fights over whether people of faith have a right to discriminate against LGBTQ people generally. But the opposite is true. The bill would lead to more litigation by providing less clarity about the balance Congress first struck between religious liberty and nondiscrimination protections a half century ago in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The courts have spent the past 65 years interpreting that balance and implementing existing law and this proposal would upend that carefully developed body of law in the service of expanding discrimination against LGBTQ people.

And it would also exclude people seeking reproductive health care from protections against sex discrimination, undermining and stigmatizing access to care that is constitutionally protected.

We Aren’t Finished Until we are all Protected

We need legislation that provides LGBTQ people with comprehensive, nationwide nondiscrimination protections and closes gaps in our civil rights laws for everyone. Earlier this year, the House of Representatives did exactly that – on a bipartisan basis – when it passed the Equality Act. It is now time for the Senate to act.

The vast majority of Americans – from across the political spectrum and a wide range of religious beliefs and backgrounds – believe that it is both wrong to discriminate against LGBTQ people and that our nation’s civil rights laws should protect people from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. LGBTQ people deserve nothing less. The Equality Act is the only bill which meets that standard.

Ian S. Thompson, ACLU Washington Legislative Office

This year was another of devastating attacks on immigrants’ rights by the Trump administration. However, in both red and blue states, we fought and won new measures that stymie Trump’s deportation machine. These local wins, though often overshadowed by the president’s xenophobia, are powerful. Here are some of the most surprising and significant of our 2019 immigrant justice victories in the states.

In Michigan, a former marine’s arrest prompts police reform

Grand Rapids, Michigan police kept veteran and U.S. citizen Jilmar Ramos-Gomez in immigration detention for 3 days — even though he was carrying his U.S. passport when he was arrested. The stunning case prompted a public outcry. Following advocacy by the ACLU of Michigan, the Grand Rapids Police Department issued a new policy prohibiting police stops and interrogations based solely on suspected violations of immigration law; and the Kent County Sheriff issued a new policy requiring a judicial warrant for all Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainees.

A landmark 60 Massachusetts localities have opted out of ICE collaboration

Years into an effort to end the entanglement of state and local police collaboration with ICE, the number of Massachusetts towns and counties opting out of ICE collaboration has reached 60. The latest: In November, the rural community of Greenfield — home to many undocumented farm workers —overrode the mayor’s veto to pass a Safe City ordinance. This policy stops police from asking about immigration status and prohibits giving ICE information about people in local custody. Shortly after the decisive victory, opponents tried to repeal the ordinance through a ballot initiative, but the ACLU of Massachusetts worked with a broad coalition on the ground to defeat it.

New Jersey makes statewide advances on immigrant justice

The New Jersey Attorney General issued a major directive: New Jersey’s counties can no longer participate in 287(g) agreements, which allow ICE to deputize local law enforcement as federal immigration officers. These agreements have a record of contributing to racial profiling and the harassment of immigrant communities. Additionally, the state legislature approved a 50 percent increase in funding for free legal counsel to people detained in New Jersey who face potential deportation. Finally, the governor signed a bill severely restricting the use of solitary confinement in state prisons and county jails, including those that detain immigrants.

Las Vegas and Nashville sheriffs end anti-immigrant agreements

The Las Vegas, Nevada police department withdrew from its 287(g) agreement with ICE and announced it will end its practice of honoring ICE detainers, prompted by the ACLU of Nevada and several groups. The sheriff in Nashville, Tennessee ended a rent-a-bed program that allowed ICE to use the local jail for immigration detention.

New York and Oregon make driver’s licenses accessible to all

Across the country, hundreds of thousands of undocumented people struggle to get to work and take their children to school because they don’t have access to driver’s licenses. Driving without a license can lead to their arrest, detention, and deportation. Expanding access to driver’s licenses to all eligible individuals regardless of immigration status is good for public safety because it ensures more people on our roads are tested, trained, and qualified. New York passed a driver’s licenses for all bill in June and Oregon did so in July. Now there are a total of 14 states making driver’s licenses eligible to residents regardless of immigration status, plus D.C. and Puerto Rico.

Nebraska school districts agree to anti-discrimination measures

Following an ACLU of Nebraska report on barriers to immigrant and refugee kids registering and enrolling in school, major school districts in Omaha, Norfolk, and Crete agreed to make changes. The state’s Department of Education is beginning to develop new regulations in response to the report.

Utah, Colorado, and New York pass laws to protect non-citizens from deportation

This spring, Utah became one of the few Republican-led states to pass a so-called 364-day law. Colorado and New York passed similar bills. These measures reduce the maximum jail sentence for misdemeanor offenses by one day, from 365 to 364 days, protecting immigrants from serious consequences imposed by federal immigration law that kick in at 365 days or more — even if the person’s actual sentence is just a few days. Those consequences include detention, deportation, and loss of opportunity for individuals to adjust their immigration status. These reform measures ensure that convictions for minor offenses like shoplifting don’t carry devastating consequences.

There are a lot more wins, including major reform legislation in California, Illinois, and Washington.

The threat to immigrants’ rights is far from over. Still, we can expect that states will continue to take action as public opinion evolves on immigrants’ rights. Six in 10 Americans now oppose the Trump administration’s agenda of deporting immigrants without lawful status. In 2019, state and local officials got the message: Our communities must and will fight back.

Naureen Shah, Senior Advocacy and Policy Counsel, ACLU