DOJ-OGR-00000433.jpg

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 22 Filed 07/16/19 Page3of9 Hon. Richard M. Berman July 16, 2019 Page 3 plain text — expressly providing that the presumption is “[s]ubject to rebuttal,” and otherwise mandating bail on the “least restrictive” conditions that reasonably assure the defendant’s presence and community safety — on its head. It defies legislative intent. It thwarts the presumption of innocence. And it violates the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth amendment rights to due process, counsel, a defense and equal protection, not to mention the Eighth Amendment guarantee of bail — all based on a suspect if not invidious classification. To be sure, wealthy defendants do not deserve preferential treatment. But they certainly shouldn’t be singled out for worse treatment — in effect, categorically disqualified from bail, at least in a presumption case — on the basis of their net worth. Second, it bears emphasis that the presumption is hardly an insurmountable bar to release in a § 1591 prosecution.3 To the contrary, courts have determined that there are suitable conditions under which 3 E.g., US v. Brinson, No. 18-CR-04-GKF, 2013 WL 11305792 (N.D. Okla. Feb. 8, 2013); US v. Afyare, No. 3:10-cr-00260, 2011 WL 1397820 (M.D. Tenn. April 13, 2011); US v. Gardner, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1025 (N.D. Cal. 2007). DOJ-OGR-00000433