On New Year’s Day, a dangerous but hilariously misnamed new law was set to take effect in Illinois. The “SAFE-T Act” was scheduled to alter the state’s handling of criminal prosecutions in ways that would make it much harder to prosecute and imprison criminals. One of the key facets of the bill would bring an end to cash bail in most cases, allowing even more suspects to be immediately put back out onto the streets after being detained. Prosecutors from across the state sued to prevent the rule from going into effect and last Wednesday a county judge found the law to be unconstitutional and barred it from taking effect in the counties where those prosecutors work. On Saturday, the state supreme court upheld that ruling and halted the law from taking effect across all of Illinois. An appeal will be filed in short order. (WGN TV)

The Illinois Supreme Court has halted the elimination of cash bail that was set to take effect January 1.

The high court says it ordered the stay to maintain consistent pretrial procedures throughout Illinois while the justices prepare to take up the matter.

The decision follows days of confusion after Kankakee County Judge Thomas Cunnington ruled cashless bail unconstitutional. Prosecutors in 64 Illinois counties sued to stop the no-cash bail policy under the landmark SAFE-T Act law.

Asking the courts to overturn a dangerous and stupid law is an uphill battle because dangerous and stupid laws are being passed all over the country every year. But the courts in Illinois have found a different approach that may be more effective. The county judge (with the potential concurrence of the state supreme court) declared the “bail reform” to be unconstitutional. The Illinois state constitution, as with most other states and the federal Constitution, mandates the separation of powers between the three branches of the government.

The investigation and prosecution of crimes are the responsibilities of the executive branch. The setting of bail and other conditions during a trial fall upon the judicial branch. So imposing limits on those pre-trial proceedings should fall outside the purview of the legislative branch. This is an argument that prosecutors in other states with disastrous “bail reform” laws (like New York) might want to look into.

Given the current conditions in Illinois, most notably in Chicago, it’s amazing that this law was even drafted, to say nothing of being passed and signed by the governor. Crime rates are up in nearly every category, with carjackings and other automotive thefts being particularly more frequent. But unless a victim is physically attacked during the robbery, no carjacker could be held on bail under this law. So the odds are that they would be grabbing their next car before the police could even finish their paperwork back at the station.

All of these laws seeking to mandate cashless bail are being promoted under the same demented premise. It’s claimed that they disproportionately impact communities of color. But the law is supposed to be colorblind, at least in theory. And if you habitually continue to break the law, you need to be put behind bars regardless of the melanin content of your skin cells.

It’s also equally obvious that there are plenty of criminals out there who pay attention to these types of changes in the law. Knowing that there will be few if any consequences for their actions, some people who might have feared committing crimes will likely decide to take the risk. When you throw open the doors to the candy store, a certain subset of people are going to start coming in.

It’s simply not possible that the liberals pushing for all of these laws didn’t realize this would happen. They can’t all be that stupid. So we’re left yet again to wonder if this isn’t being done deliberately. What sort of people would actively work to create a more chaotic and lawless society? The only answer that jumps to mind would be people who are actively working to see that society collapse.