# How does this SCOTUS ruling affect civil forfeiture? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 20, 2019, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927 "2019-02-20T21:28:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![GreysonCarlisle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2019, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/1 "2019-02-20T21:28:54Z")
[Supreme Court clamps down on ‘excessive fines’ by states](https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/430742-supreme-court-clamps-down-on-excessive-fines-by-states) > [@](#): > > The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled unanimously that states must adhere to the Constitution’s ban on excessive fines, a decision that will likely limit the ability of states to impose certain fees and seize property. Certainly, it won’t end the practice. But hopefully, it’ll make it a lot less profitable. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2019, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/2 "2019-02-20T22:03:29Z")
Is there a definition of “excessive fines” that the states can use as a guideline? ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2019, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/3 "2019-02-20T22:09:11Z")
As I understand it, the ruling prohibits states and cities from taking “excessive” amounts. Definition of excessive is still to be determined, but in the case in question, the guy lost a truck that was worth four times more than the amount he could be legally fined. Governments will have to limit themselves to taking less than that from now on, but how much less is yet to be determined. So the ruling is better than nothing, but not great. On the plus side, Clarence Thomas has, more or less, [declared](http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=Clarence+Thomas+civil+assert+forfeiture&d=4862364412937930&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=nkrL4UwPXhKjJcFzYKIDoG0EjAlZQI-c) that he views the whole idea of civil asset forfeiture as unconstitutional. If there are four other justices who share that opinion, it may eventually be abolished when the right case makes it the Supreme Court. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2019, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/4 "2019-02-20T22:47:46Z")
Seriously, the Indiana Supreme Court thinks that the 8th amendment only applies to Federal action? I don’t suppose they think any other amendments only apply federally, do they? ---
**Author:** ![GreysonCarlisle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2019, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/5 "2019-02-20T22:55:14Z")
If a cop takes your stuff under CF but doesn’t charge you with any crime, is that considered excessive? Or, since there’s no fine or charge, does this ruling not apply? ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2019, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/6 "2019-02-20T23:01:57Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Seriously, the Indiana Supreme Court thinks that the 8th amendment only applies to Federal action? I don’t suppose they think any other amendments only apply federally, do they? The grand jury requirement of the 5th Amendment and the civil jury requirement of the 7th Amendment have not yet been applied to the states. The 2nd Amendment was only applied to the states in 2010. ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2019, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/7 "2019-02-20T23:06:21Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Seriously, the Indiana Supreme Court thinks that the 8th amendment only applies to Federal action? I don’t suppose they think any other amendments only apply federally, do they? Originally, the entire Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2019, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/8 "2019-02-20T23:20:34Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Seriously, the Indiana Supreme Court thinks that the 8th amendment only applies to Federal action? I don’t suppose they think any other amendments only apply federally, do they? I don’t think the respondents made a spirited argument along these lines. What the state of Indiana argued was more along the lines of, sure excessive fines are unconstitutional, but taking a guy’s vehicle isn’t a fine so that prohibition didn’t apply. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2019, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/9 "2019-02-20T23:38:19Z")
> [@GreysonCarlisle](#): > > If a cop takes your stuff under CF but doesn’t charge you with any crime, is that considered excessive? Or, since there’s no fine or charge, does this ruling not apply? I don’t think that’s been technically considered a fine as a general rule, because it’s the asset that’s considered the criminal, and I guess it gets the death penalty, or perpetual involuntary servitude, or something… ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2019, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/10 "2019-02-21T00:17:35Z")
Unless it’s a business… that type of person can operate with near impunity, apparently. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2019, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/11 "2019-02-21T00:41:51Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > As I understand it, the ruling prohibits states and cities from taking “excessive” amounts. Definition of excessive is still to be determined, but in the case in question, the guy lost a truck that was worth four times more than the amount he could be legally fined. Governments will have to limit themselves to taking less than that from now on, but how much less is yet to be determined. So the ruling is better than nothing, but not great. From reading the opinion, I don’t believe that it goes even that far (to say that four times the fine is excessive). It simply says that the 8th Amendment indeed applies to the states and it is back to Indiana to determine if the “fine” in this case was excessive. Further, it seems to leave open the question of whether a civil forfeiture is even a fine as the Court expressly declined to overturn prior precedent because it was not asked to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2019, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/12 "2019-02-21T01:02:27Z")
Precedence for “excessive” was linked in this thread: [https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=871147](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=871147) ---
**Author:** ![LTU2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/22d042/32.png) [@LTU2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LTU2)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2019, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/13 "2019-02-21T04:44:32Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Seriously, the Indiana Supreme Court thinks that the 8th amendment only applies to Federal action? I don’t suppose they think any other amendments only apply federally, do they? The cruel and unusual punishment clause was already incorporated, as an example, Deliberate Indifference. It was the Excessive fines provision that was not, this ruling does just that, incorporates it. The 3rd AM has not been addressed by the SC either concerning the incorporation doctrine. ---
**Author:** ![ctnguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@ctnguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ctnguy)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2019, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/14 "2019-02-21T11:32:00Z")
> [@LTU2](#): > > The 3rd AM has not been addressed by the SC either concerning the incorporation doctrine. Not by the SC, true, but the Second Circuit [has held](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engblom_v._Carey) that the 3rd Amendment is incorporated against the states. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2019, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/15 "2019-02-21T22:07:47Z")
The 7th Amendment is not incorporated against the states, nor is the 5th Amendment grand jury requirement. ---
**Author:** ![bubba001](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f17d59/32.png) [@bubba001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bubba001)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2019, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-this-scotus-ruling-affect-civil-forfeiture/829927/16 "2019-02-22T03:09:30Z")
It’s already got the attention of the police chiefs association in Michigan. The head of that group was quoted as saying “ The IRS and courts seize stuff, why can’t we?”