Asset Forfeiture v. The 8th Amendment Reaches the US Supreme Court - Granite Grok

Asset Forfeiture v. The 8th Amendment Reaches the US Supreme Court

US Supreme Court Building

It has been 5-months since we shared the news. The Supreme Court agreed to hear an Asset Forfeiture challenge. The case will address the question of whether the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment applies to states. Oral arguments will be heard Wednesday the 26th. If the court agrees it could have a significant impact on the practice.

Related: Gov. Hassan Signs Off On Asset Forfeiture Reform (in NH) But Never Admits It.

George Will, quoted in this update from Reason.com, explains the genesis of the challenge.

“Tyson Timbs made a mistake, but not one as important as Indiana’s Supreme Court made in allowing to stand the punishment the state inflicted on him. He was a drug addict — first with opioids prescribed for a work-related injury, then heroin — when his father died. He blew the $73,000 insurance payout on drugs and a $41,558 Land Rover, which he drove when selling $225 worth of drugs — two grams of heroin — to undercover police officers. Timbs’s vehicle was seized and kept, which amounted to a fine more than 184 times larger than the sum involved in his offense…”

The State of Indiana kept the Land Rover, and Timbs took them to court. All the way up the chain. Claiming it was excessive and that the Eighth Amendment prohibits that. Which it does, for the Feds.

But what, exactly is excessive?

Excessive is subjective. Take Nancy Pelosi for example. Her infamous “crumbs” remark. It tells us that someone who used elected office to become a millionaire sees a few thousand dollars as crumbs. You can’t even buy a decent pair of shoes for that. To most of us, it is a lot but to her why bother. The same rules could apply to decide what sort of seizure is excessive.

Any seizure? 

We won’t get that but before anyone tries to decide such a metric the ruling must state that the 8th Amendment applies to the States. And we could hope that there’s some indication that property is protected from seizure except where its sale is required to pay for part or all of a fine resulting from a conviction but don’t hold your breath.

ICYMI – If You Went Back in Time and Convinced Obama’s Mother to Get an Abortion…

>