State and local authorities cannot treat Americans like ATMs. There are instead federal constitutional limits to the many fines, fees and forfeitures that states and localities impose. That is the principle that Tyson Timbs and the Institute for Justice established at the U.S. Supreme Court in 2019.
In a unanimous opinion by Justice Ginsburg, the Court held that the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause applies in state and local proceedings. The court reversed the Indiana Supreme Court’s determination (and that of three other states) that federal constitutional protections simply did not apply within state borders.
The case shines a spotlight on the excessive fines and fees often imposed by governments, and showcases yet another example of the inevitable abuse of power that results when government employs civil forfeiture, a process through which police and prosecutors seize someone’s property and keep the proceeds for themselves, thus giving law enforcement an incentive to maximize profits rather than seek the neutral administration of justice.
The case attracted amicus briefs from a diverse coalition of groups calling on the Court to hold that the Excessive Fines Clause applied nationwide. The groups included the Cato Institute, American Civil Liberties Union, Southern Poverty Law Center, NAACP, Constitutional Accountability Center, and Pacific Legal Foundation. All of the amicus briefs can be downloaded from the Supreme Court’s website.
The Supreme Court heard argument on November 28, 2018 at 10 a.m. Click here to read a transcript and click here to listen to the audio.
On February 20, 2019 the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that states cannot impose excessive fines.
On remand, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in October 2019 that the Excessive Fines Clause provides meaningful protection against outsized fines and forfeitures. The court then sent the case back to the original trial court to determine whether confiscating Tyson’s vehicle is unconstitutional. The trial court ruled In Tyson’s favor in April 2020, and Tyson got his vehicle back in May 2020. The government appealed again to the Indiana Supreme Court, which ruled in Tyson’s favor in June 2021.
Case Team
Attorneys
Sam Gedge
Senior Attorney
Staff
John E. Kramer
Vice President for Strategic Relations
Case Documents
Petition for Certiorari
Brief in Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari
Final Reply in Support of Cert
Merits Brief
Reply Brief for Petitioners
Transcript of Oral Arguments
Supreme Court Opinion
Opening Brief for Appellees
Supplemental Response Brief for Appellees
Indiana Supreme Court Opinion (On Remand)
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgement
Indiana Supreme Court Opinion
Response Brief for Appellees (2020 Appeal)
Media Resources
Get in touch with the media contact and take a look at the image resources for the case.
John E. Kramer Vice President for Strategic Relations [email protected]Related News
Liberty & Law Article
Protecting Liberty Nationwide Through Legislative Reform
Liberty & Law Article
Timbs v. Indiana: The Fight Against Excessive Fines Five Years Later
Press Release
MEDIA ADVISORY
Liberty & Law Article
VICTORY: IJ Wins Unanimous U.S. Supreme Court Decision
Liberty & Law Article
A Promising Day for Tyson Timbs—and the Eighth Amendment
Liberty & Law Article
IJ Symposium on the 14th Amendment Calls for Judicial Engagement
Liberty & Law Article
IJ Returns to the U.S. Supreme Court
Liberty & Law Article
IJ Supreme Court Case Brings Together Diverse Advocates for Property Owners
Liberty & Law Article
IJ Scores Sweeping Forfeiture Victory in New Mexico
Liberty & Law Article
IJ Delivers One-Two Punch Against Airport CASH SEIZURES
Liberty & Law Article
CERT GRANTED!
Liberty & Law Article
Does the Eighth Amendment Protect Against State and Local FORFEITURES?
Liberty & Law Article
Victory for Homeowners in Charlestown
Liberty & Law Article
VICTORY: IJ Helps Musician Stop a Highway Robbery
Related Cases
Civil Forfeiture | Private Property
Family Jewelry Business Fights Back to End Predatory Civil Forfeitures at Indianapolis FedEx Hub
Henry and Minh Cheng, who run a wholesale jewelry business, are fighting Indiana to keep money a customer sent them through FedEx. Indiana police seized the money and prosecutors are trying to take it through…
Civil Forfeiture | Private Property
New lawsuits seek return of coins and cash seized in 2021 FBI raid
After giving up on using civil forfeiture to claim their safe deposit boxes, the FBI did not return all of Don, Jeni, and Michael's property. They are suing to get their missing coins and cash…
Civil Forfeiture | Private Property
When the government seizes property from people without justification, and they have to spend money to get their property back, they deserve to be made whole.
Brian Moore fought to get his property back from the federal government and he won. In 2021, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents seized $8,500 in cash from him at Atlanta’s airport while he was waiting…
Related Hearings
Timbs v. Indiana Oral Argument
After Tyson Timbs got caught selling four grams of heroin to undercover officers, he pleaded guilty to drug dealing. He served one year on house arrest, paid $1,200 in court fees, and, most importantly, got clean. But the state of Indiana cared a lot more about his car—an expensive (and legally purchased) Land Rover, which he was driving the day of his arrest. The state filed a lawsuit to civilly forfeit the vehicle, arguing that it had been used to convey Tyson a few blocks to one of his meetings with the undercover officers. Read More