In February 2024, several news outlets reported that Maryland’s funding for pretrial electronic monitoring (EM) had abruptly run out, jeopardizing the liberty of hundreds of people under supervision across the state and sparking a renewed conversation among state leaders about pretrial justice.
It was not the first time policymakers considered the issue – several sets of reforms have been proposed and shelved over the last 20 years. But Maryland is now at a crossroads and will soon have to make some hard decisions about the future of EM and pretrial services more broadly.
To shed light on current policies and practices and inform ongoing reform efforts, the Justice Policy Institute studied the use of EM to supervise pretrial clients in Maryland. JPI’s research team used a qualitative approach, inviting pretrial supervision leaders from each of Maryland’s 23 counties and Baltimore City and each of the five licensed private providers to share information on how EM is used with pretrial clients in their jurisdictions. JPI also requested aggregate data on people on pretrial EM supervision over the last eight years from each county that reported using EM to supervise pretrial clients.
This report summarizes findings from the project, including detailed descriptions of how pretrial EM operates in Maryland and how it impacts people’s lives under supervision. It also summarizes the latest research on best practices around using EM.
While people under supervision, judges, and prosecutors all seem to agree that EM is an appealing alternative to jail time, the burden it poses must be taken seriously as we consider policy and practice around pretrial supervision. And, the current research suggests that EM does not reliably reduce failure to appear or recidivism in pretrial populations. The report concludes with recommendations for lessening the burden of EM and improving pretrial supervision services.
Read the report.