Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Wed 05/28/2025 View Tue 05/27/2025 View Mon 05/26/2025 View Sun 05/25/2025 View Sat 05/24/2025 View Fri 05/23/2025 View Thu 05/22/2025
2019-11-09 -Land of the Free
Supreme Court Delivers Unanimous Victory for Asset Forfeiture Challenge
[Reason] The Eighth Amendment prohibition against excessive fines and fees applies to states as well, SCOTUS rules, opening a new way to challenge outlandish forfeitures.

States are bound by the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against excessive fines and fees when they seek to seize property or other assets from individuals charged or convicted of a crime, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Wednesday.

It's a decision that hands a major victory to critics of civil asset forfeiture, and it opens another avenue to legal challenges against that widely used (and often abused) practice by which states and local governments can seize cars, cash, homes, and pretty much anything else that is suspected of being used to commit a crime.

The case before the Supreme Court, Timbs v. Indiana, involved the seizure of a $42,000 Land Rover SUV from Tyson Timbs, who was arrested in 2015 for selling heroin to undercover police officers. He pleaded guilty to his crimes and was sentenced to one year of house arrest and five years of probation. On top of that, the state of Indiana seized his 2012 Land Rover—which he had purchased with money received from his late father's life insurance payout, not with the proceeds of drug sales—on the ground that it had been used to commit a crime.

Timbs challenged that seizure, arguing that taking his vehicle amounted to an additional fine on top of the sentence he had already received. The Indiana Supreme Court rejected that argument, solely because the U.S. Supreme Court had never explicitly stated that the Eighth Amendment applied to the states.

On Wednesday, the high court did exactly that.

"For good reason, the protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history," wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the opinion. "Excessive fines can be used, for example, to retaliate against or chill the speech of political enemies," she wrote, or can become sources of revenue disconnected from the criminal justice system.
Posted by 3dc 2019-11-09 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11132 views ]  Top

#1 But what about asset forfeiture that does not involve a criminal charge and thus cannot be considered a fine?
"Civil asset forfeiture proceedings charge the property itself with involvement in a crime. This means that police can seize your car, home, money, or valuables without ever having to charge you with a crime." (Heritage Foundation)
Posted by Glenmore 2019-11-09 02:04||   2019-11-09 02:04|| Front Page Top

#2 "For good reason, the protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history," wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the opinion.

She sort of skips over that rationale when it comes to the right of Christians to practice their religion free from government interference. You know that First Amendment thingy.
Posted by Procopius2k 2019-11-09 07:05||   2019-11-09 07:05|| Front Page Top

#3 Well, it is a start to roll back the government over reach that has been constant since FDR.
Posted by DarthVader 2019-11-09 08:19||   2019-11-09 08:19|| Front Page Top

#4 Another wonderful rupture of the law that the War on Drugs has brought us. Along with Mexico being a failed state.

But victory is right around the corner! Surely no change is needed! The drug laws are working great!
Posted by Herb McCoy  2019-11-09 08:44||   2019-11-09 08:44|| Front Page Top

#5 Ref #3:. If he were alive today, he'd still be president.
Posted by Besoeker 2019-11-09 08:54||   2019-11-09 08:54|| Front Page Top

#6 Very interesting, but six months old - 02/20/2019.
Posted by Bobby 2019-11-09 11:59||   2019-11-09 11:59|| Front Page Top

15:26 Pancho Poodle8452
15:26 trailing wife
14:34 Frank G
14:28 Melancholic
14:27 NoMoreBS
14:14 swksvolFF
14:12 swksvolFF
13:54 mossomo
13:51 mossomo
13:50 NoMoreBS
13:50 Abu Uluque
13:44 Abu Uluque
13:41 NoMoreBS
13:39 Abu Uluque
13:36 mossomo
13:36 swksvolFF
13:32 mossomo
13:26 Frank G
13:12 Regular joe
13:12 mossomo
13:11 swksvolFF
13:08 Abu Uluque
13:00 swksvolFF
12:59 Regular joe









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com