Source: https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-08/02-excessive-fines.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 01:22:57+00:00

Document:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inﬂicted.
29 Ex parte Watkins, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 568, 574 (1833).
30 Milwaukee Pub. Co. v. Burleson, 255 U.S. 407, 435 (1921).
31 Tate v. Short, 401 U.S. 395 (1971); Williams v. Illinois, 399 U.S. 235 (1970).
32 Browning-Ferris Industries v. Kelco Disposal, Inc., 492 U.S. 257 (1989).
33 492 U.S. at 265.
34 492 U.S. at 266.
35 492 U.S. at 268.
36 In Austin v. United States, 509 U.S. 602 (1993), the Court noted that the application of the Excessive Fines Clause to civil forfeiture did not depend on whether it was a civil or criminal procedure, but rather on whether the forfeiture could be seen as punishment. The Court was apparently willing to consider any number of factors in making this evaluation; civil forfeiture was found to be at least partially intended as punishment, and thus limited by the clause, based on its common law roots, its focus on culpability, and various indications in the legislative histories of its more recent incarnations.
37 United States v. Bajakajian, 524 U.S. 321, 334 (1998).
38 524 U.S. 321 (1998).
39 The Court held that a criminal forfeiture, which is imposed at the time of sentencing, should be considered a fine, because it serves as a punishment for the underlying crime. 524 U.S. at 328. The Court distinguished this from civil forfeiture, which, as an in rem proceeding against property, would generally not function as a punishment of the criminal defendant. 524 U.S. at 330–32.
40 524 U.S. at 334.
41 In Bajakajian, the lower court found that the currency in question was not derived from illegal activities, and that the defendant, who had grown up a member of the Armenian minority in Syria, had failed to report the currency out of distrust of the government. 524 U.S. at 325–26. The Court found it relevant that the defendant did not appear to be among the class of persons for whom the statute was designed; i.e., a money launderer or tax evader, and that the harm to the government from the defendant’s failure to report the currency was minimal. 524 U.S. at 338.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.