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 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]
Civil forfeitures are subject to the "excessive fines" clause of the U.S. Constitution's 8th amendment, both at a federal level and, as determined by the 2019 Supreme Court case, Timbs v. Indiana, at the state and local level. [6] A 2020 study found that the median cash forfeiture in 21 states which track such data was $1,300. [7]
Tyson Timbs celebrates the return of his Land Rover, which was seized in 2013 as part of a drug case in Grant County. State authorities returned the vehicle to Timbs in 2020 after the U.S. Supreme ...
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 ...
Justice John M. Harlan II in his dissenting opinion in Poe v. Ullman (1961). The Due Process Clause has been used to strike down legislation. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments for example do not prohibit governmental regulation for the public welfare. Instead, they only direct the process by which such regulation occurs. As the Court has held before, such due process "demands only that the ...
Dismissal of Trump classified documents case was the goal of Justice Thomas, other conservatives. David G. Savage. July 15, 2024 at 2:57 PM. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in an undated photo.
U.S. Const. Amend. 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 ...