The author explores how court officials set and justify pretrial conditions. Attending bond court over five months, the author conducts a mixed-methods ethnography of over 500 case proceedings where pretrial conditions are first set to analyze how case-level decisions are made and justified while setting individual cases in the context of case processing trends. Findings show that the working group negotiating pretrial conditions is highly routinized. Furthermore, the pretrial conditions are routinely set based on a predictive logic of future law violation which is justified by “performance” logics of past arrest but relies on predicting “dangerousness” to other people in the future. However, predictive logics are combined with understandings of addiction and lack of social support in drug cases. This research extends existing theories of courtroom working group function and the emerging centrality of performance logics to justify legal conditions. This study also engages reproducible ethnographic practices, creating a record of bond court in 2022, where money bail is the most common pretrial condition, that future researchers can use as a comparison point to bond court after the abolition of money bail in Illinois on January 1, 2023. Overall, this work builds on working group theory and suggests that predictive logics are central to how court officials justify punishing people pretrial.