Challenging For-Profit Probation Scheme in Giles County
McNeil et al. v. Community Probation Services et al.
In 2018, five named plaintiffs sued Giles County, TN and two private probation companies on behalf of a class of people who were being supervised on for-profit probation. The lawsuit describes how the companies were extorting millions of dollars off the backs of the poorest people in Giles County by threatening them with arrest and jailing if they didn’t make payments, and extending their supervision for years if they were unable to pay. The Plaintiffs brought RICO and constitutional claims, settling in February 2022 for over $2 million and the cancellation of approximately $6 million in debt.
The lawsuit resulted in the County ending its contracts with both companies and eliminating misdemeanor probation altogether in Giles County, and the district court issued landmark rulings holding that the for-profit probation scheme violated due process and equal protection.
Media Coverage:
New Lawsuit Focuses on Private Probation in Giles County | NewsChannel 5 Nashville | Apr 24, 2018
Partners:
Law Office of Kyle Mothershead
Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, LLC
Filings:
Consent Decree (Jan 13, 2022)
Memorandum on PSI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgement (Feb 3, 2021)
Memorandum on Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Feb 3, 2021)
Sixth Circuit Opinion Upholding Preliminary Injunction (Dec 23, 2019)
Memorandum Granting Preliminary Injunction (Feb 14, 2019)
Complaint (July 13, 2018)
More from the Ending the Criminalization of Poverty
Sandoval v. Riverside. In May 2025, individuals detained in Riverside County jails filed a class action lawsuit challenging Riverside County’s cash-based jailing of individuals between their arrest and first court hearing, as well as Riverside County’s unnecessary delay of that hearing. Rabbi David Lazar and Reverend Jane Quandt chose to join this lawsuit because they view cash-based jailing as unconscionable. The lawsuit was filed against Riverside County Superior Court, Riverside County, the Riverside County Sheriff’s Office, and Sheriff Chad Bianco.
In partnership with public defenders in Oregon, Civil Rights Corps is challenging Oregon’s longstanding practices of jailing people charged with misdemeanors prior to trial and jailing people charged with other crimes without constitutionally required due process.
Butler v. Prince George's County. In 2022, CRC and partners filed a class action lawsuit challenging Prince George’s County's pretrial detention practices. The lawsuit seeks a declaration that PG County and its officials violate Plaintiffs’ rights under the United States and Maryland Constitutions by detaining people pretrial without meeting the substantive and procedural standards required for pretrial detention.
Urquidi v. City of Los Angeles. CRC and co-counsel brought suit in California Superior Court in November 2022 on behalf of several individuals who had been jailed for five days simply because they could not access enough cash to pay for their freedom.
Hester v. Gentry. In 2018, Civil Rights Corps and partners filed a lawsuit alleging that hundreds of people in Cullman County, Alabama, are routinely jailed before trial due to their inability to pay bail in exchange for their release.
Feltz v. Regalado. In 2018, Civil Rights Corps filed a lawsuit challenging Tulsa County’s unconstitutional wealth-based pretrial detention system. Tulsa County used a secured money bail schedule to determine conditions of release for almost every person arrested in the county.
Briggs v. Montgomery. In 2018, we filed a lawsuit against Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery and Treatment Assessment Screening Center, Inc. for operating a diversion program that charges hundreds of dollars in fees to people accused of possessing small amounts of marijuana. In 2024, the Court approved a landmark $2.6 million settlement.
Graff v. Aberdeen Enterprizes II, Inc. On November 2, 2017, Civil Rights Corps, the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law, and private counsel filed this putative class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma on behalf of individuals facing arrest because of their inability to pay their court fines.
Mays v. Dart. In 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic hit the U.S., many of us protected ourselves by isolating in our homes. For the millions of people trapped in jails and prisons across the country, this was not an option.