The order also explicitly limits Trump’s ability to attack witnesses or his co-defendants, including on social media.

      • comedy@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s only to assure the accused comes back to face the charges. It isn’t a penalty. Otherwise, the thinking goes, the defendant will have no reason to come back and face the court. This was probably extra true around the time of the founding of the US, when someone could more easily slip away and start a new life

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          If it’s not not based on ability to pay, it can’t possibly work like you describe. Instead poor people get stuck in jail because they can’t pay, and rich people never set foot in jail because the bond is pocket change to them. From what I gather, that’s exactly how it works in practice, so it’s really just a system to give special treatment to rich people and punish poor people who haven’t been convicted of a crime.

          • comedy@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            In a practical sense, it does work as you say, and can prevent the poor from obtaining bail. The system wasn’t explicitly designed that way, and rich people who are dangerous to the community can get super high bail set as well. Source: I’m a lawyer

    • macrocephalic@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Isn’t it? Shouldn’t it be? Isn’t it supposed to be a disincentive? What’s the risk of losing $200k to a man who is supposed to be worth billions (but is surely worth hundreds of millions at least)?