Detention or Dissent: Judicial Utilization of Public Safety Assessments During Pretrial Detention Hearings in a New Jersey Courtroom.

This study investigates how the Public Safety Assessment (PSA), a risk assessment tool used in New Jersey’s pretrial detention hearings, informs judicial decisions during virtual hearings in a single Mercer County courtroom (N = 330). Findings reveal that judges frequently depart from PSA recommendations—58% of cases showed departures—with downward departures (less restrictive than recommended) occurring most often in cases where detention was advised, resulting in many defendants being released despite prosecutor detention motions. Judicial decisions were primarily influenced by factors related to defendant dangerousness and blameworthiness, such as current monitoring status, number of alleged offenses, and burden-shifting cases, while race and ethnicity were not statistically significant predictors. Judges commonly justified their departures by citing public safety concerns and defendant monitoring status, often favoring more restrictive supervision when PSA recommended release and more lenient outcomes when detention was recommended. The study highlights the persistence of judicial discretion in pretrial decisions and suggests that risk assessment tools like the PSA may not fully constrain judicial decision-making, raising questions about their effectiveness and the need for clearer guidelines and oversight.