This morning the Supreme Court will take up the issue of the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against “excessive fines” and does it apply to the states? Interestingly this issue has never been directly resolved by the SCOTUS.
A very good summary and analysis of the case, written by Amy Howe at scotusblog.com, can be found here:
www.scotusblog.com/…
The case at hand, Timbs v Indiana, is an appeal of an Indiana verdict that allowed the state to confiscate Mr. Timbs’ Land Rover after his conviction on a drug charge. Timbs had proof that the car was not purchased using profits from dealing in drugs. Timbs, who was sentenced to six years in prison, challenged the forfeiture of the Land Rover and won at both the trial court and state court of appeals. However, the Indiana Supreme Court reversed the lower courts and the Land Rover was surrendered. Timbs based his case on the 8th Amendment prohibition of “excessive fines”. The State of Indiana has raised, as one of its defenses, that the 8th Amendment does not apply to the states. That is how the case ended up at the SCOTUS.
I think it is interesting to many of us that the 8th Amendment has never been definitively applied to the states. There is a significant amount of interest in this case because high fines, and criminal and civil forfeiture have become significant revenue sources for cities, counties and states.
The issue of fines, and forfeiture, are also an area important to the issue of economic justice. Some years ago a very good friend received a “red light camera” ticket in Silicon Valley. The fine was $500 , and we discussed it. While no one likes receiving a ticket, and the insurance penalty and drivers license “points” that entails, the payment of the fine was really not an issue for my friend, a successful Silicon Valley executive. However, we both wondered what would happen to someone living paycheck to paycheck, where $500 is a week’s pay? We both felt that it was not equitable and that judges should have some discretion to apply a fine higher or lower than the state-wide standard.
Some European countries do base fines on your income. There was a case reported, and discussed here at DKOS in 2015, of a driver in Finland who was fined $103,000 for going 65 in a 50mph area, fifteen miles over the speed limit. The Atlantic had the story and you can read it here.
www.theatlantic.com/...
The $100K speeding ticket and my friends $500 red light citation, are relevant to the 8th Amendment and its application to the states. My friend and I thought that the poor should receive a significant discount, maybe 90% off or a $50 fine, while a founder of Google should pay $5,000, allowing a judge the discretion to set the amount of the fine one order of magnitude in each direction. We both thought that $100K was too steep for the driver in Finland, although I understand the rationale and formula that the Finn’s use. A half dozen European countries do have sliding scale fines, based on income, and there have been a few local attempts in the US, but they didn’t last.
It is the rare case which finds the Southern Poverty Law Center and Judicial Watch on the same side, both of whom filed amicus briefs supporting Timbs. Fines, and asset forfeiture related to criminal convictions are center stage today, and government entities who rely on forfeiture as a revenue stream will be watching closely.
An update by Amy Howe at scotusblog.com, with comments from today’s oral argument. It looks favorable for Timbs.
www.scotusblog.com/...
Very good post oral argument summary from Iiya Somin at the libertarian, Reason, website:
reason.com/...