DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Supreme Court says constitutional protection against excessive fines applies to state actions

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...m=.64b645575bbc

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday that the Constitution’s prohibition on excessive fines applies to state and local governments, limiting their abilities to impose fines and seize property.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, on just her second day back on the bench after undergoing cancer surgery in December, announced the decision for the court, saying that the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause protects against government retribution.

“For good reason, the protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history: Exorbitant tolls undermine other constitutional liberties,” Ginsburg wrote. “Excessive fines can be used, for example, to retaliate against or chill the speech of political enemies. . . . Even absent a political motive, fines may be employed in a measure out of accord with the penal goals of retribution and deterrence.”


[He sold drugs and Indiana seized his car. Does the Constitution protect him?]

The court ruled in favor of Tyson Timbs of Marion, Ind., who had his $42,000 Land Rover seized after he was arrested for selling a couple hundred dollars’ worth of heroin.

He drew wide support from civil liberties organizations who want to limit civil forfeitures, which they say empower localities and law enforcement to seize property of someone suspected of a crime as a revenue stream.

This ad will end in 11 seconds

(Gabe Silverman/The Washington Post)

Some justices, too, had become worried about the state and local efforts.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a recent opinion that civil forfeitures have “become widespread and highly profitable.”

“This system — where police can seize property with limited judicial oversight and retain it for their own use — has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses,” Thomas wrote, referring to reporting by The Washington Post and the New Yorker.

[Aggressive police take hundreds of millions of dollars from motorists not charged with crimes]

At oral argument, Timbs’s lawyer said the case was a simple matter of “constitutional housekeeping.”

The Constitution’s Bill of Rights protects against actions of the federal government. But the Supreme Court over time has applied it to state and local governments under the due-process clause of the 14th Amendment. In 2010, for instance, the court held that the Second Amendment applied to state and local government laws on gun control.

The Eighth Amendment states: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Two of those commands — regarding bail and cruel and unusual punishments — have been deemed to apply to state and local governments. But until now, the ban on excessive fines had not been.


And the Indiana Supreme Court noted that when overturning a lower court’s ruling that the actions taken against Timbs were excessive.

Ginsburg’s opinion makes clear that the clause applies, and that it is “incorporated” under the 14th Amendment’s due process Clause. Justices Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch agreed with the outcome, but said they would have relied on a different part of the 14th Amendment.

__________________

best two reasons for my joy:

1. the supreme court ruled unanimously on this decision, and LEO's can't harass civilians for their public property as much, though it will be a process.

2. the jeff sessions of the country are furious. makes me smile even more.

Bout damn time!

Police departments and law enforcement agencies have been using unfair seizures to augment the funding of their departments for too long. Seizing funds and property for slight, even non-existent infractions has become a side business motivated by greed, and perpetuating injustice and corruption. This has been a long time coming.

j/c...

This was the right and necessary ruling by the Supreme Court.

The Greenville News in South Carolina recently did an outstanding piece of investigative journalism on Civil Forfeiture laws, specifically, exposing how the police departments target minorities and police are collecting millions of dollars.

Terrific work by the journalists involved. Long read of in-depth reporting, but certainly worth reading. The Greenville News did a multiple part series called 'Taken'.

https://www.greenvilleonline.com/in-dept...inaslegallegacy

Their right. You shouldn't make drug dealers poor and more desperate. You should make them dead. The only good drug dealer is a dead one.

Good lord just be quiet with your witch lynchings fatansies.

I'm sorry there was too much bonging for me to hear you.

you mean too much satanist music in your background.

lol not for this dawg i prefer to "Bless em" =)

People in the North will never understand what "Bless em" means.

lmao

its the polite way of saying f off. anybody who has southern friends know.

err i was referring to our favorite cleveland brown WR Jarvis Landry and it was meant to be funny ^^

It's what Southern people say to stupid people "Bless Your Heart"

Pay attention to what I just wrote. He says that for a reason.

"God love'im" is another one.

So they used the example of a guy selling heroin to gain my empathy?

no. he was the one who case just happen to move all the way up to the supreme court over excessive fines.

doesn't matter if it's a drug dealer or a nun, abuse of the law is abuse of the law.

Only there's not that many qualified to say that since they fall into the same category. Atlanta doesn't actually represent the south.

Fascists don't understand the nuance between abuse of power and legitimate force. To them it's all about respecting the law and justice. That's why they're fine with police shooting those who flee, children being held in cages, and mandatory minimums.

In this case, the cop is being tried for murder.

Mandatory minimums?

The sentencing that further strengthen the carceral state. Especially in relation to non violent crimes and the three felony rule.

Ok, the three felony rule that was written by Biden, signed by Bill Clinton, promoted by Hillary Clinton, and strongly enforced by Kamala Harris... I just wanted to make sure there was clarity on which fascists we were talking about.

Yes those Clintons and that Copmala. I've always said Republicans and Democrats are Pepsi and Coke, two sides of the same coin, the left twix and right twix.

I agree with you about the points you made concerning the Clinton's. But when it comes to Harris, it's the judges who enforce the law, not the prosecutor. And when the law has strict guidelines in regards to sentencing guidelines, I don't see what role the prosecutor plays in that.

Nope. Copmala is a fascist too. She prosecuted parents who had truant kids, she wanted to increase the labor population as AG of California. She used prisoners to fight wild fire. She's a Cop.

If she is a cop then I like her.

Prove it and vote for her then.

I might.

Most all states prosecute the parents of frequently truant children. I guess it would have been better to let California burn?

That's the problem with the far left. It's an all or nothing sum with no allowance for common sense or middle ground. It's why you'll fail again.

No, you're making it an all or nothing game. There is a gigantic line between paying felons 23 cents a day to fight fires in a career they will be banned from after finishing their time, if they do, and letting wildfire destroy all of California. There are a lot of options like allocating resources to the state guard, increasing number of fire fighter employees, calling in help from other parts of the country. Relying on prison labor is not the answer.

And truancy courts are the most kangaroo courts of all time. They also directly affect the poor the most.

Are you saying the poor can't send their kids to school and should be exempt from the same laws as the rest of society? If you plan to ever escape poverty, you better go to school. I'd say enforcing the laws that are on the books in regards to truancy may be the best possible thing to help the poor escape poverty.

And in case you missed it, there were firefighters from all over the country fighting those fires. They were brought in from everywhere. Sometimes desperate times call for desperate measures.

I think I see the problem here. Harris had the job of enforcing the law. That's what her profession was. And since she did such a good job at it, somehow you think that's a bad thing.

The so called far left is far more open to common sense, negotiation, and reasonable debate than the alt-right. So spare me the need to correct you Pit, it's ok to be center or even center right BUT don't bash the team that's got your back.

If that’s the team that has your back, it’s only because they’re looking for a place to stick the knife.

They have to look for a place because my back is full of holes from the knives the GOP put there over the years as they slowly sold me, my people, and my country down the river. Guys like you Tulsa must enjoy being owned by corporate masters that could care less about you. You hold on so tightly to the illusion of freedom they let you have after stripping away all true freedom. You should name all your grandchildren 'cog in the wheel'. That's where your inaction at this historic time will leave them, just feeding the corporate machine until the end. The end they will experience in their lifetime.

We really need an applause smiley.

That was so Moses-esque, "sold me, my people, and my country down the river, Pharoah, let my people go"!

No team has my back.

Kamala Harris lobbied to keep inmates incarcerated instead of letting them out on early release for good behavior that they earned so that they could be forced to stay on and fight the fires.

That's some pretty dirty pool

And here is the Texas senator quoting Mussolini on Twitter.