Court Fines and Fees Create Modern Prisoners of Debt

Author: University of Washington
Published: 4 Dec 2015 - Updated: 2 Sep 2026
Publication Details: Peer-Reviewed | Findings

Table of Contents:
Synopsis - Definition - Overview - FAQs - Insights, Updates - Related Content

Synopsis

This article examines the financial challenges that individuals with disabilities and seniors face due to bank fees and corporate practices. It highlights how banks impose substantial fees, such as overdraft charges exceeding $30, which disproportionately impact those on fixed incomes. The piece also critiques cable companies for offering expensive services with limited value, suggesting alternatives like internet streaming services to reduce costs. Additionally, it discusses the inadequacies of large retail stores in accommodating disabled customers, recommending local grocery stores and dollar stores as more accessible and cost-effective options. The article emphasizes the need for corporations to recognize their social responsibility toward vulnerable populations and offers practical advice for individuals to manage expenses and avoid exploitative practices.*

At a Glance

• 1 - Arizona courts can add an 83 percent surcharge on fines levied against prisoners. Louisiana charges indigent defendants a $40 public defender fee.
• 2 - One disabled woman saw $13,000 in court fines grow to nearly $20,000 with interest and collection surcharges. Her damaged credit then blocked her from leasing an apartment.
• 3 - A five-year, $3.9 million University of Washington project is the first systematic study of court fees across Washington, California, Minnesota, Missouri, Texas, Illinois, Georgia, and New York. Alexes Harris serves as principal investigator.
• 4 - Benton County was sued by the ACLU of Washington over court-imposed fees, with about 20 percent of its jail inmates serving time for nonpayment. Those who cannot pay may join a work crew but must pay a $5-a-day fee to do so.

Topic Definition

Monetary Sanctions

Monetary sanctions are the fines, fees, surcharges, and interest that courts attach to a criminal case, charging defendants for things like DNA samples, electronic monitoring, jury trials, and even the cost of their own incarceration. Unlike a fine meant purely as punishment, these obligations often exist to help fund the justice system itself, and they accumulate whether or not a person can actually afford them. Because interest and collection charges keep climbing long after a sentence is served, the total owed can balloon into thousands of dollars, and failure to pay can send someone back to jail. In practice, this ties many low-income people, including those with disabilities and mental health conditions, to the courts indefinitely, turning a completed sentence into a debt that follows them for the rest of their lives.

Overview

Criminals are meant to pay their debts to society through sentencing, but a different type of court-imposed debt can tie them to the criminal justice system for life and impact their ability to move forward with their lives.

Though debtors' prisons were eliminated in the United States almost two centuries ago, a modern-day version exists in the dizzyingly complex system of fines and fees levied against people as they move through the court system. Offenders are charged for everything from DNA samples to electronic monitoring devices, jury trials and even room and board while imprisoned. The fees can add up to thousands of dollars, and those who fail to pay are routinely jailed.

Little is known about how such fines and fees differ among or even within states, but a new University of Washington-based initiative will provide new insight on the issue. Alexes Harris, an associate professor of sociology, is the principal investigator of a five-year research project on monetary sanctions in eight states. The $3.9 million project, funded by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, will be the first systematic study of how multiple states implement court-imposed fees.

The initiative will focus on Washington, California, Minnesota, Missouri, Texas, Illinois, Georgia and New York. Harris and her collaborators at partner universities will research how legal fees and fines are applied at state and local levels, interview defendants and court officials and compile a data set that Harris hopes will foster a broader national conversation.

"This data doesn't exist on a national level," Harris said. "It's an interesting puzzle to try to figure out."

Harris is among stakeholders who attended White House and Department of Justice events this week focused on court-imposed fees and criminal justice system reform. Her new project furthers research that Harris conducted in Washington state, and her findings will be detailed in her book "A Pound of Flesh: Monetary Sanctions as a Permanent Punishment for the Poor," slated for publication next summer.

Harris found that criminal offenders in Washington are charged a minimum of $600 in court fines and fees, and 12 percent interest starts accruing the day of sentencing and continues through the prison term. Fees and charges levied by other states may vary widely - in Arizona, for example, courts can impose a surcharge of 83 percent on any fines levied against prisoners, while in Louisiana, indigent defendants are charged a $40 public defender fee.

The average amount of fines imposed in a felony case in Washington is $2,540, according to a report last year by the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington and Columbia Legal Services. And though the report found that up to 90 percent of people charged with felonies in Washington are indigent, the fees are charged regardless of ability to pay. "Willful nonpayment" of fees, when someone is able to pay but does not, is a jail-able offense under state law.

The practice "punishes people simply for being poor and brings little to no benefit to the government or the general public," the report notes. "This system places severe, long-lasting burdens on persons living in poverty."

For many people, Harris said, legal debt is a permanent burden that prevents them from rebuilding their lives after incarceration. One woman Harris met, disabled and partly deaf, was living with her ex-husband, three kids and her former father-in-law in a three-bedroom apartment in Kitsap County while working to pay off what she owed.

Her sentencing for 11 charges ranging from forgeries to possession of stolen properties carried court fines of $13,000. With interest and collection surcharges, her debt had grown to just under $20,000 when it was transferred to a private collection agency. Her consequent poor credit was making it difficult for her to secure a lease on her own apartment.

"This is going to follow her forever," said Harris. "We have this idea that you do the crime, you do the time and you can move forward. But the system marks poor individuals for life. They become prisoners of debt."

Legal fines and fees disproportionately impact poor people, who are more likely to be arrested and charged, said Harris.

"These are often people living in poverty, people of color, people with disabilities, with mental health and substance abuse issues," she said. "These are people who are already marginalized, and they just can't pay the fees."

An arbitrary system of enforcement and collection adds to the disparity. Harris researched court fees and fines in five Washington counties and discovered that the amounts charged, repayment requirements and enforcement varied widely. In one county, payments must be paid monthly each Thursday at noon or debtors are required to appear in court that afternoon. Spokane County previously required debtors who hadn't kept up on payments to report to jail without a hearing, but in 2010 the state Supreme Court ruled the practice unconstitutional.

"There are these very, very different processes across the state," Harris said. "They were completely different in every county I've looked at."

Superior courts in Washington can impose more than 20 different fees at a judge's discretion. Court clerks determine the minimum monthly payments, which start at $20 per charge but can be up to $50. In some jurisdictions, Harris said, sheriffs knock on doors to arrest debtors for nonpayment or round up those who are homeless, sleeping in parks or on streets. Debtors can be asked to use public assistance payments - or more questionable tactics - to pay their fees.

"One prosecutor told me, 'I regularly ask them to hold a cardboard sign by the side of the road,'" Harris said. "He said, 'Do you know how much money they can make?'"

In March, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that judges must assess defendants' ability to pay legal financial obligations and not impose them if they can't be paid. But whether judges will still impose the mandatory $600 in fees is unclear, said Harris, whose research was cited in the ruling.

In October, the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington sued Benton County over its court-imposed fees, alleging the county wrongfully punishes people for being poor. About 20 percent of inmates in the county's jails are serving time for nonpayment of fees, and those who can't pay are sent back to jail or can work on a county work crew to pay off their fines - but must pay a $5-a-day-fee to do so.

Fines have always been imposed in the U.S. criminal justice system, but states began ratcheting up fines and fees in the 1990s and 2000s to help pay the costs of a swelling incarceration system. All states now charge defendants and offenders fees of some type, and all but two have increased court fees and fines since 2010, an NPR survey found. The practice raises questions about the fundamental purpose of punishment, Harris said.

"There are these two aims, and they're competing aims," she said. "One is to punish people and the other is to do cost re-coupment. We need to have a broader conversation about what the point of punishment is."

"Should a punishment be set that all people can eventually achieve? If so, monetary sanctions are an unsurmountable sentence that many will never be able to fulfill. Does that mean they can never have a second chance and serve their debt to society?"

Collaborators on the project are Beth Huebner at the University of Missouri, St. Louis; Karin Martin at John Jay College of Criminal Justice; Mary Pattillo at Northwestern University; Becky Pettit at the University of Texas, Austin; Sarah Shannon at the University of Georgia; Bryan Sykes at the University of California, Irvine; and Chris Uggen at the University of Minnesota.

Frequently Asked Questions

NOTE: Researched FAQs by Disabled World (DW)

What is a debtors prison

A debtors prison is a jail where people are held for failing to pay money they owe. Although the United States abolished them nearly two centuries ago, jailing people for unpaid court fines is often described as a modern version of the practice.

Are court fines and fees the same thing

No, they are different. A fine is a financial penalty for the offense itself, while fees are charges added to cover costs such as monitoring, DNA collection, or public defenders, and both can be combined into a single legal debt.

Can you be jailed for not paying court fees in the United States

Yes, in many states willful nonpayment is a jailable offense when a person can pay but chooses not to. Courts are increasingly required to assess a defendants ability to pay before imposing or enforcing these obligations.

Why did court fines and fees increase so much

States began raising fines and fees during the 1990s and 2000s to help fund a rapidly growing prison and jail system. Most states have continued increasing these charges to shift costs onto defendants and offenders.

What does ability to pay mean in sentencing

Ability to pay refers to whether a defendant has the financial means to cover court obligations without hardship. Some courts now must evaluate this before ordering fines and fees so that penalties are not imposed on people who cannot afford them.

How does legal debt affect people after prison

Legal debt can prevent people from rebuilding their lives by damaging credit and blocking access to housing and employment. Ongoing interest and collection charges can keep the debt growing long after release.

Do court fees vary from one place to another

Yes, the amounts charged, repayment rules, and enforcement methods differ widely between states and even between counties in the same state. This creates an uneven system where outcomes depend heavily on location.

What happens to unpaid court debt sent to collections

Unpaid court debt can be transferred to private collection agencies that add surcharges on top of the original balance. This increases the total owed and can further harm a persons credit and financial stability.

Insights, Analysis, and Developments

Editorial Note:

While financial institutions and major corporations justify their fees and pricing models as standard business practices, their impact on vulnerable populations cannot be ignored. Many people with disabilities and seniors live on tight budgets where every dollar counts, making excessive fees and overpriced services more than just a nuisance - they're a real hardship. The solutions outlined in this article provide practical ways to navigate these challenges, but the larger issue remains: corporations must do better. Fairness in banking, accessibility in retail, and reasonable pricing for essential services should not be optional - they should be the norm. Until businesses take real steps toward change, consumers must stay vigilant, make informed decisions, and support companies that prioritize people over profits

Attribution/Source(s): This peer reviewed publication was selected for publishing by the editors of Disabled World (DW) due to its relevance to the disability community. Originally authored by University of Washington and published on 4 Dec 2015, this content may have been edited for style, clarity, or brevity.

* Editorial additions by Ian C. Langtree.