Q: In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.
Breaking News Emails Get breaking news alerts and special reports. The news and stories that matter, delivered weekday mornings. 
  
 / Updated By Pete Williams 
  
 Holding defendants in jail because they can't afford to make bail is unconstitutional, the Justice Department said in a court filing late Thursday — the first time the government has taken such a position before a federal appeals court. 
  
 It's the latest step by the Obama administration in encouraging state courts to move away from imposing fixed cash bail amounts and jailing those who can't pay. 
  
 Related: A Victory in Bail Reform for Criminal Justice Advocates 
  
 "Bail practices that incarcerate indigent individuals before trial solely because of their inability to pay for their release violate the Fourteenth Amendment," the Justice Department said in a friend of court brief, citing the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. 
  
 A corrections officer removes handcuff from an inmate in his cell at San Quentin State Prison in San Quentin, California, on Aug. 16. Bloomberg / Bloomberg via Getty Images 
  
 The filing came in the case of Maurice Walker of Calhoun, Georgia. He was kept in jail for six nights after police arrested him for the misdemeanor offense of being a pedestrian under the influence. He was told he could not get out of jail unless he paid the fixed bail amount of $160. 
  
 Related: Civil Rights Advocates Applaud Feds' Fight Against 'Debtors' Prisons' 
  
 Justice Department's civil rights lawyers said in their brief that courts must consider a person's indigence and look at other ways of guaranteeing an appearance in court. 
  
 "Fixed bail schedules that allow for the pretrial release of only those who can play, without accounting for the ability to pay," the government said, "unlawfully discriminate based on indigence." 
  
 A federal judge in January ruled in Walker's favor, ordering the city to let those arrested on misdemeanor offenses be released on their own recognizance and to make other changes in its post-arrest procedures. 
  
 In appealing that order, the city said the preset amounts of the city's bail schedule are tied to the seriousness of each offense and are specifically allowed under Georgia law. 
  
 Related: Reformers Seek to Undo Growth of New 'Debtors' Prisons' 
  
 "A system of unsecured recognizance bonds," the city said in its appeal," greatly reduces the incentive for defendants to appear." 
  
 The city is supported by the Georgia Sheriff's Association and by a group representing the nation's bail bondsmen. They argue that the Constitution does not guarantee bail, it only bans excessive bail. 
  
 "It thus simply cannot be that any defendant arrested for any crime must be immediately released based on a bare assertion of indigence," the group said in its court filing. 
  
 Related: Lawsuit Charges 13 St. Louis Suburbs With "Extorting" Black Drivers 
  
 Barry J. Pollack, president of the National Association of Criminal Defense lawyers, said Friday said he applauded the Justice Department's for making "critically important arguments." 
  
 A spokesman for the defense lawyers group said it believes "pretrial liberty must be the norm and detention prior to trial the carefully limited exception." ||||| WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department filed an amicus brief in a federal circuit court on Friday that said mandating inmates pay bail to be released before a trial violates civil rights guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment. 
  
 The filing in the 11th Circuit marks the first time the Justice Department has told a federal court that mandating bail for release discriminates against people who cannot afford the fee. ||||| WASHINGTON ― The Obama administration has joined the fight against the American bail industry, telling a federal appeals court that bail practices that keep poor defendants locked up because they cannot afford to purchase their freedom are unconstitutional. 
  
 “Bail practices that do not account for indigence result in the unnecessary incarceration of numerous individuals who are presumed innocent,” the Justice Department wrote in an amicus brief filed Friday. 
  
 The brief marks the first time DOJ has weighed in on the constitutional requirements of bail systems in a federal appeals court. 
  
 Bail practices in the United States often leave poor people languishing in jail simply because they cannot afford a certain amount of money to purchase their freedom. Many of the more than 800 jail deaths logged by The Huffington Post between July 2015 and July 2016 involved individuals who were incarcerated after being arrested for minor offenses and who were unable to afford their bail. 
  
 DOJ says that many jurisdictions still incarcerate people without taking their financial circumstances into account, and notes that the use of money bail has “increased substantially since 1990.” 
  
 Maurice Walker is at the center of the case at issue. The 54-year-old was arrested by the Calhoun Police Department in Georgia in September 2015 for allegedly being a “pedestrian under the influence.” Walker, who has limited income and serious mental health issues, was told he would not be released unless he came up with $160, the fixed amount set by bond for someone charged with being a pedestrian under the influence. 
  
 Court was held just once a week in Calhoun, and Walker was arrested on a Thursday before Labor Day when there was no court. He remained in jail for six days, and would have been there longer ― but he was released after lawyers with Equal Justice Under Law and the Southern Center for Human Rights filed a class action lawsuit on his behalf while he was still behind bars. 
  
 A lower federal court had ruled earlier this year that “any bail or bond scheme that mandates payment of pre-fixed amounts for different offenses to obtain pretrial release, without any consideration of indigence or other factors, violates the Equal Protection Clause.” 
  
 That ruling is being appealed by the city, and is also opposed by the American Bail Coalition. ABC claims that the plaintiff takes the “extreme position” that “any defendant is entitled to immediate release based on an unverified assertion of indigency,” and argues that bail is a “Liberty-Promoting Institution As Old As The Republic.” 
  
 RELATED STORIES Our Bail System Is Leaving Innocent People To Die In Jail Because They're Poor 
  
 DOJ, which has faced pressure from advocates to get aggressive in cracking down on unconstitutional practices that plague the American justice system, said that fixed bail practices discriminate against people who lack financial means. 
  
 From Friday’s filing: 
  
 Fixed bail schedules that allow for the pretrial release of only those who can pay, without accounting for ability to pay and alternative methods of assuring future appearance, do not provide for such individualized determinations, and therefore unlawfully discriminate based on indigence. Under such bail schemes, arrestees who can afford to pay the fixed bail amount are promptly released whenever they are able to access sufficient funds for payment, even if they are likely to miss their assigned court date or pose a danger to others. Conversely, the use of such schedules effectively denies pretrial release to those who cannot afford to pay the fixed bail amount, even if they pose no flight risk, and even if alternative methods of assuring appearance (such as an unsecured bond or supervised release) could be imposed. Such individuals are unnecessarily kept in jail until their court appearance often for even minor offenses, such as a traffic or ordinance violation, including violations that are not punishable by incarceration. 
  
 The Justice Department filing mentions the consent decree that the Civil Rights Division reached with Ferguson, Missouri, to end unconstitutional bail practices found as part of an investigation into the police department and municipal court there. A recent lawsuit filed by ArchCity Defenders targets other municipalities in St. Louis County that have engaged in similar practices. 
  
 Alec Karakatsanis, the co-founder of Equal Justice Under Law, told The Huffington Post that having the backing of the Justice Department as well as organizations like the American Bar Association and CATO is an important step in bringing an end to unconstitutional practices. 
  
 “Hundreds of thousands of human beings are held in American cages every night solely because they are too poor to make a payment,” Karakatsanis said. “Today’s amicus filings of support by a wide range of groups, including the Department of Justice, takes us closer to finally eradicating poverty jailing from American society.” |||||
A:
It's unconstitutional to keep poor defendants in jail before their trial simply because they can't afford to pay bail. That's according to an amicus brief filed in federal court by the Justice Department on Friday, Reuters reports. According to NBC News, the Justice Department found that the practice violates the 14th Amendment and that bail amounts that don't take poverty into account "unlawfully discriminate based on indigence." It says courts must find a better way to make sure impoverished defendants show up to court than keeping them in jail. The brief was filed in the case of Maurice Walker. Walker, who is poor and has mental health issues, was arrested for being a pedestrian under the influence in Calhoun, Georgia, the Huffington Post reports. Court is only held once per week in Calhoun, and Walker was kept in jail for six days because he couldn't afford to pay the $160 bail for his freedom. The city argued that it's perfectly legal to set bail amounts based on the seriousness of crimes without any consideration for a defendant's ability to pay it. A federal court ruled against Calhoun, but the city appealed.