Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Detainers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council authorizes hearing on detainer policy after advocates press for court data
Summary
City Council adopted a resolution calling the Committee on Legislative Oversight to hold hearings on detainer policy and asked the First Judicial District to explain its use of detainers for people with post‑trial probation and parole sentences after community groups and advocates urged more transparency.
Philadelphia City Council on Jan. 23 adopted a resolution authorizing hearings on the city’s use of detainers and calling on the First Judicial District of Pennsylvania to provide an overview of its policies regarding detainer issuance for people with post‑trial probation and parole sentences.
The resolution directs the Committee on Legislative Oversight to convene hearings to examine how detainers are used and how they affect people returning to the community.
The measure won unanimous voice approval after advocates and community groups pressed councilmembers to act. "Together, we can build a system that prioritize[s] equity, accountability, and second chances," said Reverend Dr. Michelle Simmons, founder of Why Not Prosper, who described the nonprofit’s research and re‑entry work and urged council to bring courts to the table. Simmons told council that her organization’s Straight Out of Trouble initiative had supported 31 people applying for early termination, helped 89 people reengage with parole officers and assisted hundreds with warrants and other barriers to reentry.
Supporters at the podium linked the resolution to local efforts to reduce racial disparities in incarceration. "The community not only is informed but empowered," said Keira Bradford Gray, who spoke in favor of the hearing and credited community engagement with better public‑safety outcomes.
Councilmember Kendra Brooks sponsored the measure; Majority Leader Catherine Gilmore Richardson moved its adoption on Brooks’ behalf. The resolution passed by voice vote.
Council members who spoke in subsequent remarks said the hearings were intended to obtain factual descriptions of practice and to identify administrative or statutory changes that could reduce unnecessary jail stays while preserving public safety.
The resolution does not itself change detainer policy or court practice; it requests testimony and documents from the First Judicial District and other stakeholders so the committee can make recommendations. The committee’s next steps, a hearing schedule and any requested documents were not specified at the meeting.
Council documents show the resolution will be printed in the journal and referred to the Committee on Legislative Oversight for scheduling. Advocates at the meeting urged the committee to prioritize obtaining data that Simmons said remains difficult for community organizations to access.
