SCOTUS to Decide Civil Forfeiture Under 8th Amendment; Timbs v. Indiana

[Fife]

[pineapplemike]

dan carlin weighs in

Dan Carlin
@HardcoreHistory
Anyone who wants an example of why the U.S. system isn't functioning well:The Supreme Court just ruled UNANIMOUSLY that civil asset forfeiture as practiced is unconstitutional ...more than three decades after the law was changed to allow it. Justice delayed is justice denied.
https://mobile.twitter.com/HardcoreHist ... 2388666368

dig the top comments

John Amatulli
@jamatulli01
Feb 22
Replying to @HardcoreHistory
Topic for a common sense?

Andrew Kurzka
@AKurzka
Feb 22
Replying to @HardcoreHistory
Common sense episode coming soon to explain? Haha

Spencer
@hothamcheeese
Feb 22
Replying to @HardcoreHistory
feel like this would make for a good episode of common sense

Joey Gangelhoff
@JoeyGangelhoff
Feb 21
Replying to @HardcoreHistory
You should do a Common Sense episode about it..

[Speaker to Animals]

I guess justice was delayed because we didn't vote hard enough.

[Fife]

Uh, is anyone surprised that Dan completely misunderstands what SCOTUS just did (and didn't do)?

[Martin Hash]

Dan’s point is why something so obviously unconstitutional took 30 years to get heard.

[Speaker to Animals]

The constitutional remedy was in Congress. How'd that pan out?

[Fife]

Dan’s point is why something so obviously unconstitutional took 30 years to get heard.

Nothing was declared unconstitutional.

The 8th is incorporated under the 14th, by traditional substantive due process. That's it and the case is remanded to Indiana. That's the whole show, nothing else to see.

You read the opinion, right? Or some accurate summary?

[Martin Hash]

That’s bad. Now we depend on Indiana to decide.

[Fife]

It's bad, because it's just another Dred Scott / Slaughterhouse case.

There's a federal standard now about who is to make the call on these kinds of cases, as the 8th applies to the states, per the ruling. If you think that's an unqualified good thing, then OK. But we'll be waiting for another case on another day (maybe Timbs II) to get some federal black dress standard about what is and isn't federally constitutional regarding civil forfeiture.

Otherwise, it's just another nail in the coffin of what the 14th was actually about, privileges and immunities.

Brion McClanahan and StA are right-- this is an issue best left up to the people of each state to take care of (like marriage, abortion, &c.). But that ain't how the bosses roll in federal city. And Darkness and Decay and Mr. Lincoln held illimitable dominion over all.

[Martin Hash]

Damn, that McClanahan show was tedious. Goddamn.

As far as I can tell from all that rambling, Indiana's State Constitution prohibits Civil Forfeiture, but the State Court incorrectly appealed to an 8th Amendment violation, and the only thing SCOTUS said was that it was a State issue, meaning Indiana's State Constitution should have been the determining law, not the 8th.