Amendment 1Constitutional amendment · Put on the ballot by lawmakers
Deny bail for serious crimes
Explain it like I'm 5
This would let judges keep some people in jail before trial for more serious charges. Today, most people can be released on bail before trial.
Yes vote
Judges could deny bail for listed serious offenses when the proof is evident or the presumption is great, and would have to state their reasons.
No vote
The constitution would continue allowing bail to be denied generally only in capital cases when the proof is evident or the presumption is great.
The question to ask yourself
Should judges have broader power to hold people accused of serious crimes before trial when the evidence is especially strong?
The case for
- May protect the public from people accused of especially serious violent crimes.
- Lets judges hold defendants when evidence is strong instead of relying mainly on money bail.
- Requires judges to explain bail decisions on the record.
Backed by: Tennessee District Attorneys General Conference, Tennessee Sheriffs’ Association, Tennessee Voices for Victims, Republican Party of Tennessee
The case against
- Jails people before trial, although they have not been convicted.
- The 85-percent sentence category could cover more offenses than many voters realize.
- Existing judges can set strict conditions or revoke release after violations.
Opposed by: ACLU of Tennessee, Just City Memphis, Tennessee Association of Professional Bail Agents
- Money
- A one-time local publication cost of about $9,400 was estimated; other jail and court costs were not estimated.
- Don't be misled
- It is misleading to say the amendment automatically denies bail to everyone charged with these crimes, because judges must make the required evidence finding.