Rockford Sun

State Sen. Dave Syverson, R-Cherry Valley, provided a week in review on social media, discussing the SAFE-T Act during a post on Facebook.

The SAFE-T Act continues to evoke controversy across the state, according to a state website, even after Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed a trailer bill on Dec. 6, to clarify a number of components of the law, scheduled to end the cash bail system in the state on New Year’s Day while creating a level playing field with pre-trial jail time determined by potential risk to the community rather than financial ability to post bail.

"After the fall veto session resulted in the passage and the Governor’s signature of yet another trailer bill to the controversial SAFE-T Act, the lawsuit challenging its legality has been delayed,” Syverson explained in the Facebook post days after Pritzker signed the legislation.

According to the state website, revisions to the SAFE-T Act included input from a legislative group that sought input from public defenders state’s attorneys, victim advocates and law enforcement. The changes, according to the website, offer guidance on court authority regarding electronic monitoring.

"Advocates and lawmakers came together and put in hours of work to strengthen and clarify this law, uphold our commitment to equity, and keep people safe,” Pritzker said in the news release.

Moreover, the news release also pointed out that the changes to the SAFE-T Act are designed to ensure any suspects who present a threat aren’t released from jail while individuals who may not have the financial ability to post bail don’t sit in jail even though they pose no threat to the community.

Opponents of the SAFE-T Act will get their day in court, according to a report from ABC 7, which noted that Kankakee County Circuit Court Judge Thomas W. Cunnington will hear oral arguments next week regarding claims made in dozens of lawsuits. The report noted the lawsuits are likely the first of many to be brought against the SAFE-T Act.

The report also noted that the lawsuit raises questions about the constitutionality of the SAFE-T Act, and alleges it improperly addresses a number of subjects while disregarding the separation of powers. The report also noted the act may illegally amend the state Constitution.

The complexity of the SAFE-T Act also is questioned by a post on the Illinois Policy website, addressing the release of suspects on personal recognizance if they pose no threat to public safety.

The website also claims there are a number of additional factors included in the state’s laws that would preclude components of the SAFE-T Act, noting that the nature of the offense and history of the defendant can be considered when setting bail.

Further, the website notes that standards can include detainable offenses, and if a defendant meets the types of offenses, while a petition to deny pretrial release can be made with the state bearing the burden of proof to determine the defendant likely committed a qualifying crime, poses a threat to an individual, and there are no conditions that could impact the risk of flight.