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 has attracted amicus briefs from a diverse coalition of groups calling on the Court to hold that the Excessive Fines Clause applies nationwide. These groups include 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.
Tyson’s case is now pending on remand before the Indiana Supreme Court, which heard argument on June 28, 2019, to determine whether it was constitutionally excessive for the state to seize his $42,000 vehicle for a first-time drug offense involving a small amount of illegal drugs. An opinion is expected before the end of the year.
Click here to watch the argument heard at the Indiana Supreme Court.