Maurice Walker v. City of Calhoun, GA
901 F.3d 1245
11th Cir.2018Background
- Maurice Walker, an indigent arrestee charged with a Georgia misdemeanor (pedestrian under the influence), was held because he could not post a $160 cash bond; he sued on behalf of a class challenging the City of Calhoun’s money-bail practices.
- The Municipal Court adopted a Standing Bail Order: preset secured-money bail by schedule for state offenses; those who cannot immediately post must wait up to 48 hours for a judicial bail hearing with court‑appointed counsel and an indigency determination (indigency = <100% federal poverty guidelines); city‑code violations receive unsecured bonds.
- The district court enjoined the City and ordered a more protective affidavit-based indigency determination within 24 hours; it also certified a class. The City appealed and the injunction remained stayed but in effect.
- The Eleventh Circuit considered threshold jurisdictional challenges (Younger abstention; municipal § 1983 liability) and substantive constitutional claims (whether the bail scheme violates Fourteenth Amendment equal protection/due process or is governed by the Eighth Amendment).
- The panel held Younger abstention did not bar the suit and that the City may be liable under § 1983 for bail policies; it concluded Walker’s claim fits the Bearden/Rainwater hybrid equal‑protection/due‑process framework (wealth‑based detention), but rejected application of heightened equal‑protection scrutiny to the Standing Bail Order.
- The court vacated the district court’s preliminary injunction because (1) a 48‑hour presumptive window for indigency/bail determinations is consistent with due process (borrowing McLaughlin’s 48‑hour rule) and (2) the City may use judicial hearings rather than an affidavit‑only process; but it left open injunctive relief against the City’s original pre‑Standing‑Order policy as not moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of Younger abstention | Walker sought prompt bail process not to enjoin prosecutions; federal court may act | City argued federal courts must abstain under Younger to avoid intruding on state prosecutions | Younger did not require abstention; Gerstein analog controls; no abuse of discretion in district court refusing abstention |
| Municipal liability under § 1983 for bail policy | City enforced bail via police/municipal court policy; City liable | City argued municipal court is independent so City not responsible | City can be liable: Georgia law and municipal charter permit city regulation of bail; district court not clearly erroneous |
| Proper constitutional standard (Eighth vs Fourteenth) | Walker: hybrid Fourteenth (Bearden/Rainwater) claim — wealth‑based detention; process challenge | City: claim governed by Eighth Amendment (excessive bail) | Court: hybrid Fourteenth (due process + equal protection) framework applies to indigency‑based detention/process claims |
| Whether Standing Bail Order is unconstitutional; scope/timing/process of indigency determination | Walker: schedule + 48‑hour judicial hearing still permits poorer arrestees to be jailed longer; court should impose affidavit‑based process within 24 hours and heightened scrutiny | City: schedule + 48‑hour hearing with counsel is constitutional; 24‑hour rule and affidavit mandate are unnecessary; rational basis or McLaughlin 48‑hour standard suffices | Court: rejected heightened scrutiny; adopted a 48‑hour presumptive window (McLaughlin) and upheld use of judicial hearings; vacated preliminary injunction (24‑hour affidavit requirement) though original policy could be enjoined as not moot |
Key Cases Cited
- Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (Younger abstention limits federal interference in state prosecutions)
- Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 (pretrial detention without prompt judicial hearing can be enjoined; distinguishes Younger)
- County of Riverside v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44 (48‑hour presumptive rule for prompt probable‑cause determinations)
- Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660 (due process and equal protection converge where indigence causes disparate treatment; alternatives required before jailing for nonpayment)
- Pugh v. Rainwater, 572 F.2d 1053 (5th Cir. en banc) (indigent pretrial incarceration without meaningful alternatives infringes due process and equal protection; approves bail schedules only with prompt individualized review)
- Williams v. Illinois, 399 U.S. 235 (wealth‑based imprisonment for inability to pay fines is impermissible)
- United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (preventive detention framework and balancing of liberty and governmental interests)
- ODonnell v. Harris County, 892 F.3d 147 (5th Cir.) (applies Rainwater; 48‑hour hearing rule; systemic bail practices subject to heightened scrutiny where they produce absolute deprivations)