Judge ignores 60,000 arrest warrants to avoid locking up the poor and homeless
It's proved controversial among San Francisco's police and residents
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A judge has written off more than 60,000 arrest warrants for minor offences because he said they simply meant people would go to prison for being poor.
John Stewart, presiding judge at San Francisco's Superior Court, also stopped issuing new warrants a year ago for people who failed to show up to court after being charged with offences like sleeping rough and urinating in public.
The crimes are punishable only by fines and people charged with them, who are often homeless, may not attend court because they cannot afford to pay $200 or more.
A charge of failing to attend court can land someone behind bars for five days.
Judge Stewart, who is the city's top judge, said: "You’re putting somebody in jail because they’re poor and can’t pay a fine, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
"We got a lot of criticism, but we thought it was the right thing to do."
He and his colleagues have scrapped some 66,000 warrants stretching back five years.
The move was criticised by the city's police union and sections of the public.
When it was announced, union boss Martin Halloran said it was "sending a message that there is no accountability for what you have done, and the laws on the books can be violated with no repercussions".
Destroying a warrant does not eliminate someone's associated criminal charge, but Judge Stewart added: "There’s no mechanism I know of to force them to pay."
Assistant presiding judge Teri Jackson said people who do attend court but cannot pay a fine are usually given alternative sentences like community service or treatment for drug dependency.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments