Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
VIII, XIV. Timbs v. Indiana, 586 U.S. 146 (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether the excessive fines clause of the Constitution 's Eighth Amendment applies to state and local governments. The case covered the asset forfeiture of the petitioner's truck after the police found a small quantity of drugs ...
In the Timbs decision, one of Justice Thomas's stated reasons for preferring incorporation through the Privileges or Immunities Clause was what he perceived as the Court's failure to consistently or correctly define which rights are "fundamental" under the Due Process Clause. In Thomas' view, incorporation through Privileges or Immunities would ...
Timbs v. Indiana applied Excessive Fines Clause to the states For many years, the Supreme Court has ruled that the “Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause” applies to the states as well as to ...
In the 2019 case of Timbs v. Indiana where the court incorporated the Eighth Amendment's protection against excessive fines against state governments, Justice Thomas again argued in a concurrence that the right should have been incorporated via the Privileges or Immunities Clause. [21]
In Indiana, court revenue from fines and fees was $67 million in 1988, before growing to $242 million in 2008 due to the rise of mass incarceration, and then finally dropping to $137 million in ...
In Timbs v. Indiana the Supreme Court ruled that the Excessive Fines Clause applies to state and local governments under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case involves the use of civil asset forfeiture to seize a $42,000 vehicle under state law in addition to the imposition of a $1,200 fine for drug trafficking charges ...
The court, in a 4-1 decision, found that the Indiana constitution does not include a broad right to abortion, allowing Indiana to join 14 other Republican-led states in enforcing abortion bans.
VIII. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a prison official's "deliberate indifference" to a substantial risk of serious harm to an inmate violates the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment. Farmer built on two previous Supreme Court decisions ...