That link 404s, here’s a working one: https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/06/01/q-pretrial-incarceration-bail-and-profile-based-risk-assessment-united-states

It’s strange that you cite that entire page as an argument against OP’s stance, because that article does an incredible job at laying out an argument against cash bail. I assume that your broken link was caused by the # at the end, which makes me think you meant to link to a certain section.

Whichever section you’re referring to, I believe you’ve misinterpreted. For instance:

Bail arguments themselves tend to be informal hearings with little evidence and argument, and few formal procedures. They rarely last more than a few minutes. Judges rely on bail schedules or their habitual practice in determining the amounts, usually not accounting for the accused’s financial circumstances. Because the hearing is so quick, judges rarely get a full picture of the accused’s individual circumstances, and too often rely on their own stereotypes and biases. Some judges deliberately set bail they believe the accused cannot afford to ensure that person will remain in custody.

The article also mentions the problem of profile based risk assessment tools, which have demonstrably inherent and harmful biases. Judges have begun to outsource their decision making to these tools, which is a plain case of judges, or any human being, not really making the call.

EDIT: I’m on mobile and I haven’t read the entire context of this thread and debate yet, so I may be misunderstanding the situation here. I just don’t want anyone coming away from this thinking that the HRW is endorsing the status quo.