Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-175_19m2.pdf
Page Number: 71.0

Cite as:  603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

27 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

power to extract payments, whether in cash or in kind, as
punishment for some offense.”  United States v. Bajakajian, 
524 U. S. 321, 328 (1998) (internal quotation marks omit-
ted).  “The  touchstone  of  the  constitutional  inquiry  under 
the Excessive Fines Clause is the principle of proportional-
ity: The amount of the forfeiture must bear some relation-
ship to the gravity of the offense that it is designed to pun-
ish.”  Id., at 334. 

The District Court in this case concluded that the fines 
here serve “no remedial purpose” but rather are “intended
to  deter  homeless  individuals  from  residing  in  Grants
Pass.”  App.  to  Pet.  for  Cert.  189a.    Because  it  concluded 
that the fines are punitive, it went on to determine that the 
fines are “ ‘grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the of-
fense’ ”  and  thus  excessive.    Ibid.  The  Ninth  Circuit  de-
clined to consider this holding because the City presented 
“no  meaningful  argument  on  appeal  regarding  the  exces-
sive fines issue.”  72 F. 4th, at 895.  On remand, the Ninth 
Circuit is free to consider whether the City forfeited its ap-
peal  on  this  ground  and,  if  not,  whether  this  issue  has 
merit. 

C 
Finally,  the  Court  does  not  decide  whether  the  Ordi-
nances violate the Due Process Clause.  “The Due Process 
Clauses  of  the  Fifth  and  Fourteenth  Amendments  ensure 
that officials may not displace certain rules associated with 
criminal liability that are ‘so old and venerable,’ ‘ “so rooted 
in  the  traditions  and  conscience  of  our  people[,]  as  to  be
ranked as fundamental.” ’ ”  Ante, at 15 (quoting Kahler v. 
Kansas, 589 U. S. 271, 279 (2020)).  The majority notes that
due process arguments in Robinson “may have made some 
sense.”  Ante, at 19.  On that score, I agree.  “[H]istorically,
crimes in England and this country have usually required 
proof  of  some  act  (or  actus  reus)  undertaken  with  some 
measure of volition (mens rea).”  Ibid.  “This view ‘took deep