News Article: US Supreme Court unanimously limits civil asset forfeiture

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday that the Constitution's ban on excessive fines applies to state and local governments, thus limiting their ability to use fines to raise revenue.

An Indiana trial court ruled that the fine was grossly disproportionate punishment on top of other fines and a year of house detention. The state Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution's ban on excessive fines does not apply to the states.

But Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court, open during a snowstorm, disagreed with the Indiana Supreme Court.

"Forfeiture of the Land Rover, the court determined, would be grossly disproportionate to the gravity of Timbs's offense," Ginsburg wrote.

She also noted that the ban on excessive fines was added to the Bill of Rights for the purpose of protecting individual liberty. "Protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history for good reason: Such fines undermine other liberties."

She noted that those fines could be used to retaliate against political enemies and have been used as a source of revenue.

The ruling effectively means states and local municipalities cannot use fines as a mechanism for raising revenue, something many local governments do.

Click to expand...

Wednesday’s ruling in Timbs v. Indiana, authored by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is sharp and concise. It revolves around a single question of extraordinary importance. The Eighth Amendment guarantees that no “excessive fines” may be “imposed,” an ancient right enshrined in the Magna Carta and enthusiastically adopted by the Framers. But the Bill of Rights originally applied only to the federal government, not the states. After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment was ratified to apply these rights to the states, which had engaged in grotesque civil rights violations to perpetuate slavery. The Supreme Court, however, slowly applied (or “incorporated”) these rights against the states one by one, not all at once. And before Timbs, it had never incorporated the Excessive Fines Clause—allowing states to exploit their residents for huge sums of cash and property.

Click to expand...

GrayTide said:

Must have been a ten year old Land Rover.

Click to expand...