Debtors Prisons Are Making Their Ugly Return to America After Being Outlawed 200 Years Ago!

There are numerous articles posted online that describe cases where people appear to have been put in jail in some states for merely owing monetary debts. This can happen to debtors who either owe money to the court or to private parties. And this has happened in spite of the fact that debtor's prisons were outlawed federally in 1833. Most of the states followed suit after 1833 and included clauses in their constitutions prohibiting imprisonment for owing money to someone.

In spite of these prohibitions debtor's prisons seem to be making a comeback. There are states where it's possible to put someone in jail for failure to pay a debt. I am surprised that lawyers in these states have not put together constitutional challenges to someone who was thrown in jail for such a monetary debt.

According to blog I found online people are languishing in Illinois jails, in Champagne and other counties, for owing unpaid traffic tickets. A law professor from Notre Dame Law School quoted in the article says that we do have "de-facto" debtor's prisons because of this practice of jailing debtor's for merely owing money in spite of constitutional prohibitions even if the money is owed to the state. According to this law professor this creates a situation where debtors are scrambling to come up with money by any means just to stay out of jail.

An article in the Saint Petersburg Times points out that it costs the jails $53 per day (in Florida) to incarcerate these people who often don't owe much money. So the taxpayer pays for the jailing, the judge, and the whole judicial system that wastes time and money trying to collect from these destitute people. In Florida they have an ominous sounding "Collections Court" that handles these cases and about a third of Florida counties have these courts. Even in the counties without these courts people are still being jailed for owing money.

According to the Times article it costs the system $62,085 to bring in $80,450 in debt. Those languishing in jail for these unpaid tickets are certainly poor and often minority but anyone without means can get caught up in this travesty of justice. How is it still a possibility that you could go to jail for owing money? Were debtors prisons not outlawed in the 1800s? Didn't Charles Dickens inform us 200 years ago about the foolishness of this practice?

The Times article points out that you can be jailed for violating a court order or for failing to make court ordered payments. So technically they are not being jailed for owing money but it amounts to the same thing. Jail time is usually given to people who owe spousal and child support but legal experts argue that it is all illegal.

Now there is more and more disturbing chatter on the internet about debtors being jailed for owing a purely private company money. There are horror stories emerging about arrests made and persons jailed for owing money to private parties. On such

woman was arrested one day, handcuffed, put in a very cold police car, brought to jail and no one told her why for some time while the contents of her purse were unceremoniously dumped in a plastic bag. She spent a cold night in jail keeping her hands under her armpits for warmth until 16 hours later when she was informed that she missed a court hearing concerning some private debt.

In that case she had missed a court hearing but in Indiana a man faced jail for just failing to pay a purely private debt. His incarceration had nothing to do with violating a court order. According to an online article in the Minnesota StarTibune a lawyer challenged the constitutionality of a debtor being threatened with jail for owing a debt. The appellate judges agreed with the lawyer and he won the case because debtor's prisons were made illegal in Indiana in the 1850s.

The article in the StarTribune points out that there is an inconsistency with who is locked up when, and for how much debt, and the article points out that all of these things vary from state to state and county to county. It also makes mention that no one knows how often this happens as no statistics are kept of these incidents. One man in Illinois was locked up by a judge "indefinitely" for owing $300 to a lumber yard.

Now it seems that the collection agents are influencing the legal system more and more to be more creditor friendly. Some would say that the collectors are subverting the legal system and using the threat of jail and jail time extract money from people who cannot afford to pay anything towards these privately held debts.

The good news is though that bankruptcy can remove most debts from your balance sheet. After a bankruptcy discharge you legally no longer owe the debts anymore so no creditor can try to collect on them or try to get you put in jail if you don't. Your legal obligation to pay these debts is eliminated. With debt collectors gaining in power and money and influence this is a very good thing.

In California I know that the courts can threaten you with jail if you do not attend the court ordered "debtor's exam". This is where a creditor can ask you all sorts of personal questions about your assets and your financial situation. The courts cannot jail you if you do not pay the creditor in California but they threaten to jail you if you don't show up for the court ordered exam.

I filed a case for a client the day before his debtor's exam and he brought his bankruptcy case number to the debtor's exam. The other attorney did not know what to do but the judge threw the whole case out right there and told her to go to bankruptcy court for any money. My client had nothing and the creditor had no reason to declare his debts non-dischargeable so that is the last we ever saw of the creditor. My client got his discharge without a problem. Bankruptcy is indeed a powerful mechanism to defeat over-zealous creditors.