Jails in America are dangerous. So far this year, 38 people have died inside Los Angeles County jails in as many weeks. This is more than five times the number of executions in the entire state of California since 2000. Many carceral facilities across the nation are incapable of keeping people safe while in state custody.
The Trump administration recently signed an executive order to punish jurisdictions that do not incarcerate people accused of misdemeanors and lower-level crimes while they await trial. In this most recent draconian attempt to “make our cities safe again,” Trump plans to withhold federal funding from local and state governments that allow nonviolent offenders to go home and to work while they await trial.
This order does not improve public safety; it endangers more people. Public safety includes more than the free. It includes those of us who are incarcerated. Our government has a responsibility to ensure the safety, rights and dignity of people detained, whether awaiting trial or after a conviction. We abandon this obligation by holding people captive in facilities plagued by what the ACLU has called “medieval” living conditions, with incompetent medical care, illness, violence, a predatory commercial bail industry and far too many early deaths.
Denying local and state governments the freedom to decide who is and who is not a threat to public safety also undermines democratic self-governance and further erodes public trust at a moment when faith in state institutions is at its lowest in decades.
Our justice system has a responsibility to care for people who are incarcerated, regardless of their innocence. The Supreme Court ruled on this in 1976. In Estelle vs. Gamble, courts established a prisoner’s right to adequate medical care and said that deliberate indifference to serious medical needs violates the 8th Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
The COVID-19 pandemic was a recent reminder why public safety in a democracy includes people in jail. Overcrowding and poor living conditions of carceral spaces helped spread an airborne virus. Many who caught COVID while awaiting trial were at risk of spreading the contagion — and so were jail staff and law enforcement who worked inside, along with visiting families and workers who served these facilities.
When cities reduced jail admissions, dropped charges or began to release nonviolent offenders in response to the pandemic, these decarceration efforts did not increase crime. Instead, they helped bolster public safety by minimizing the spread of the virus. According to a study published in the journal Nature, the relative health and safety of white Americans saw the greatest gains of all groups following pandemic decarceration efforts.
Were Trump’s recent executive order to become a federal mandate, it would halt viable reforms to the cash bail system in Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and New Jersey. Bail reform has saved millions in taxpayer dollars and helped limit jail overcrowding — a problem that contributes to rising rates of illness, violence and death inside. And according to a report by the Brennan Center for Justice, there is no correlation between ending cash bail and an increase in crime.
When people who pose no threat to public safety lose the freedom to work, take care of family and support their communities, our justice system not only does immediate harm but also seeds resentment and distrust.
People accused of nonviolent and minor crimes who could be released until trial are instead forced to endure life-denying conditions inside. Jails in America suffer from contaminated water, pest infestations, spoiled food, dangerous heat, a drug crisis, inferior medical care and violence. In Los Angeles, a stunning report by independent journalist Cerise Castle revealed that sheriff’s deputy gangs have terrorized and threatened the lives of people within and beyond jail for decades. On Sept. 8, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against Los Angeles County for violating the constitutional rights of incarcerated people.
I have studied and measured the dangers of unsafe jails and the threats they pose to public safety. My lab at UCLA analyzed a sample of 180 deaths in 10 city and county detention centers in Maryland between 2008 and 2019. We discovered that 80% of these deaths happened while the individual was awaiting trial and had not been convicted of any crime. Half of the decedents in our sample died within 10 days of admission, and more people died in the first 24 hours than during any other time while in jail. Even short stays in detention present a significant risk of premature death.
Real public safety involves addressing the root causes of crime: low wages, lack of affordable housing and unmet health needs. It also involves protecting the dignity and rights of people on the wrong side of the law while maintaining the public trust. It is a demanding balance, but being faithful to the principles of democracy despite adversity is a defining feature of change in America.
A world where local governments are forced to keep people in jail, even for nonviolent offenses, is primed to punish being poor, unhoused, underemployed or mentally ill. It is also a world that undermines self-governance and local democratic reform.
The people of this nation deserve better.
Terence Keel is a professor of human biology, society and African American studies at UCLA. His latest book is “The Coroner’s Silence: Death Records and the Hidden Victims of Police Violence .” Facebook: Terence D Keel; Instagram: @terencedouglaskeel
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
-
Jails in America pose significant safety risks, with 38 deaths occurring in Los Angeles County jails this year alone, exceeding California’s execution rate by more than five times since 2000. Many detention facilities nationwide cannot adequately protect people in state custody, creating dangerous conditions rather than ensuring safety.
-
The Trump administration’s executive order threatening to withhold federal funding from jurisdictions that release nonviolent offenders while awaiting trial represents a counterproductive approach that endangers more people rather than improving public safety. This policy forces local governments to incarcerate individuals who pose no threat to community safety.
-
Public safety must encompass the welfare of incarcerated individuals, not just those who are free, as the government has a constitutional responsibility to ensure the safety, rights, and dignity of all detained persons. The Supreme Court established in Estelle vs. Gamble that deliberate indifference to serious medical needs violates the 8th Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
-
The executive order undermines democratic self-governance by denying local and state governments the autonomy to determine appropriate responses to public safety concerns. This federal overreach erodes public trust in institutions at a time when confidence in government is already at historic lows.
-
Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates that decarceration efforts actually enhanced public safety by reducing virus transmission without increasing crime rates. Research published in Nature showed that reducing jail populations provided health and safety benefits, particularly for white Americans.
-
Bail reform initiatives have proven effective in saving taxpayer money and reducing dangerous overcrowding in detention facilities. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, eliminating cash bail systems shows no correlation with increased crime rates.
-
Current jail conditions include contaminated water, pest infestations, spoiled food, dangerous heat, inadequate medical care, and violence. Research analyzing 180 deaths in Maryland detention centers found that 80% occurred among people awaiting trial who had not been convicted, with half dying within 10 days of admission.
Different views on the topic
-
The Trump administration argues that safe communities depend on maintaining “tough and well-equipped police force” capabilities to pursue criminals and protect innocent citizens[2]. The executive order expresses commitment to empowering state and local law enforcement to “firmly police dangerous criminal behavior” through enhanced federal support.
-
Administration officials contend that local leaders who “demonize law enforcement and impose legal and political handcuffs that make aggressively enforcing the law impossible” create conditions where “crime thrives and innocent citizens and small business owners suffer”[2]. This perspective views restrictive oversight and reform policies as obstacles to effective policing.
-
The executive order reflects concerns about “deterioration in public safety caused by rising crime, political interference in policing, and constraints imposed by reform-oriented policies at the local level”[1]. Supporters argue that federal intervention is necessary to restore order and combat what they characterize as anti-police sentiment.
-
Proponents advocate for “unleashing high-impact local police forces” while ensuring that law enforcement officers focus on “ending crime, not pursuing harmful, illegal race- and sex-based ‘equity’ policies”[2]. This approach prioritizes traditional law enforcement methods over reform initiatives that incorporate diversity and inclusion considerations.
-
The administration’s stated goal involves creating “a law-abiding society in which tenacious law enforcement officers protect the innocent, violations of law are not tolerated, and American communities are safely enjoyed by all their citizens again”[2]. This vision emphasizes strict enforcement and deterrence as primary mechanisms for ensuring public safety.