By Marleina Ubel with additional research by Dash Barany and Lauren Aung
What You Need to Know:
|
Everyone has the constitutional right to a lawyer when accused of a crime, but for many in New Jersey, that right is behind a paywall. In 2023, after extensive research from NJPP, Governor Murphy signed a law eliminating public defender fees for felony cases.[i] In New Jersey, lawyers from the state Office of the Public Defender (OPD) represent people facing felony charges, also known as indictable offenses. Yet people who need a public defender in municipal court can still be required to pay application fees.
Under current state law, people who cannot afford an attorney may be required to pay up to $200 to apply for a municipal public defender.[ii] These charges push low-income residents into debt and pressure them to give up their right to counsel to avoid financial strain. As politicians increasingly threaten to use criminal prosecution as a political weapon, the right to strong and accessible defense counsel becomes even more critical. New Jersey must eliminate these fees.
What the Law Says — and Who It Harms
New Jersey statute allows, but does not require, municipalities to charge up to $200 to apply for the “privilege” of accessing one’s constitutional right to an attorney.[iii] The majority of municipalities attempt to collect this fee.[iv] Judges may waive the fee, but only if they find significant evidence that the cost would be an unreasonable burden on the applicant — a process that is far from simple.[v] Defendants must prove that paying would cause financial hardship, often by submitting extensive personal financial documents. This process can be confusing, humiliating, and ultimately a barrier to exercising their constitutional right to counsel.[vi]
The consequences of these fees are severe. They deepen poverty and trap people in cycles of court debt and ongoing legal system involvement. People experiencing financial hardship are more likely to face criminal charges or incarceration.[vii] This reality also plays out in New Jersey courts, where approximately 90 percent of defendants are indigent.[viii] This means the vast majority of New Jerseyans facing charges are harmed by public defender fees. In most cases, families or loved ones also carry the burden of court debt. Of those, 83 percent are women.[ix] Because women are more likely to be caregivers, the harm extends to children and other vulnerable family members, spreading well beyond the individual defendant.
These burdens fall hardest on Black and Latinx/Hispanic New Jerseyans, who are more likely to experience financial hardship due to historic and systemic inequities. In 2023, 53 percent of Black households and 52 percent of Latinx/Hispanic households in New Jersey did not make enough money to meet basic needs.[x] At the same time, Black residents are more than 12 times as likely to be charged and convicted as white residents.[xi] As a result, Black and Latinx/Hispanic New Jerseyans are overrepresented among defendants who cannot afford an attorney and are disproportionately harmed by public defender fees.
New Jersey’s own Supreme Court Committee on Municipal Court Operations, Fines, and Fees warned in 2019 that these charges “can be financially devastating on defendants, have a disproportionately negative impact on the poor, and often become the starting point for a perpetual cycle of court involvement for defendants with limited resources.”[xii]
Minimal Returns, Hidden Costs
While the financial burden on New Jerseyans who cannot afford an attorney is substantial, the cash returns for municipalities are minimal. Unsurprisingly, New Jersey collects a low percentage of legal financial obligations imposed by the court. A study by the New Jersey Criminal Sentencing and Disposition Commission (CDSC) found that only about 20 percent of all legal financial obligations imposed on people on probation are collected, including public defender fees.[xiii] Because defendants applying for public defenders have already shown they cannot afford to pay, those returns are likely even smaller. For example, in East Orange, the city collected $3,523 in public defender fees in 2024, out of a $182.4 million budget. This is a mere 0.002 percent of the municipal budget.[xiv]
There are also hidden administrative costs associated with debt collection. The system incurs additional, often untracked administrative expenses related to collections and enforcement, creating an inefficient system that costs more than it generates.[xv] Nationally, collecting public defense fees costs more than 95 percent of what is collected.[xvi] New Jersey’s own CDSC report also suggests that the state’s collection system costs more to run than it collects.[xvii]
A lack of transparency and accessible data makes it difficult for the public to understand how this system works or how fees are applied. This is even true for those who need representation from a public defender. People may not realize there is a fee until they receive notice of debt.[xviii]
Recommendation: No Paywall on Justice
New Jersey must guarantee that the constitutional right to counsel is truly free and accessible, especially as the criminal legal system becomes increasingly weaponized to target people of color.[xix] This reform would complete the work the state started in 2023 when it eliminated public defender fees for felony cases. Municipal court defendants deserve the same access to justice. That means eliminating all municipal public defender application fees and ensuring public defense is funded through sustainable, equitable public investments.
In many places, access to public defenders is free for those who qualify. Municipalities like Jersey City have already led the way. Neighboring states such as New York and Pennsylvania recognize that no one should have to choose between taking on debt or defending their rights.
Ending these fees is about living up to constitutional promises. It’s about dismantling barriers that disproportionately harm Black and Latinx/Hispanic residents and closing long-standing racial and economic gaps in the legal system. Justice should be available to everyone, not only to those who can afford it.
The New Jersey Legislature must pass legislation prohibiting municipalities from charging public defender application fees. This requires:
- Amending N.J. Stat. 2B:24-17(a) to eliminate fee authorization
- Ensuring state funding covers municipal public defender costs
- Requiring transparency in public defender access and outcomes
End Notes
[i] Ubel, M. The High Cost of “Free” Representation: Why New Jersey Should Eliminate Public Defender Fees. New Jersey Policy Perspective. October 24, 2022; Ubel, M. It’s Time for New Jersey to Eliminate Public Defender Fees. New Jersey Policy Perspective. June 27, 2023; Office of Governor Phil Murphy. Governor Murphy Signs Bill Eliminating Public Defender Service Fees. June 30, 2023.
[ii] NJ Rev Stat. 2B:24-17(a) (2024)
[iii] NJ Rev Stat. 2B:24-17(a) (2024)
[iv] NJPP Analysis, Personal Communication, Phone Calls to Municipal Courts. [Oct 2024 – Sept 2025].
[v] NJ Rev Stat. 2B:24-17(a) (2024)
[vi] Supreme Court Committee on Diversity, Inclusion, and Community Engagement. 2023 – 2025 Report. Jan. 14, 2025. pg.16
[vii] Rabuy, B. and Kopf, D. Prisons of Poverty: Uncovering the pre-incarceration incomes of the imprisoned. Prison Policy Initiative. Jul. 9, 2015
[viii] The New Jersey statute defines an indigent defendant as “a person who is formally charged with the commission of an indictable offense, and who does not have the present financial ability to secure competent legal representation, and to provide all other necessary expenses of representation” (2A:158A-2). An indigent defendant is a person who does not have the resources to pay for counsel; New Jersey Criminal Sentencing & Disposition Commission. March 2023 Report. Mar. 2023. Pg. 18.
[ix] deVuono-powell, S., Schweidler, C., Walters, A., and Zohrabi, A. Who Pays? The True Cost of Incarceration on Families. Ella Baker Center, Forward Together, Research Action Design. Sep. 15, 2015.
[x] United for ALICE. The State of ALICE in New Jersey: 2025 Update on Financial Hardship. United Ways of New Jersey. 2025. Pg. 3.
[xi] Nellis, A. The Color of Justice: Racial and Ethnic Disparity in State Prisons. The Sentencing Project. Oct. 2021. Pg. 10.
[xii] New Jersey Courts. Report Of The Supreme Court Committee On Municipal Court Operations, Fines, and Fees. Administrative Office of the Courts. Jun. 2018. Pg. 15.
[xiii] New Jersey Criminal Sentencing & Disposition Commission. March 2023 Report. Mar. 2023. Pg. 16.
[xiv] NJPP Analysis, Personal Communication. Jul. 2025. On file with author; City of East Orange. 2024 Municipal Budget. April 2024. Pg. 1.
[xv] Beeman, M. et al. At What Cost? Findings from an Examination into the Imposition of Public Defense System Fees. National Legal Aid & Defender Association. Jul. 2022.
[xvi] Beeman, M. et al. At What Cost? Findings from an Examination into the Imposition of Public Defense System Fees. National Legal Aid & Defender Association. Jul. 2022. Pg. 7
[xvii] New Jersey Criminal Sentencing & Disposition Commission. March 2023 Report. Mar. 2023. Pg. 18.
[xviii] National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA). Forthcoming report. Contact author for more information.
[xix] Ghandnoosh, N. One in Five: Disparities in Crime and Policing, The Sentencing Project. Nov. 2023.
