Timbs v. Indiana

E176646

U.S. constitutional law case United States Supreme Court case

Timbs v. Indiana is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

All labels observed (2)

Label	Occurrences
Timbs v. Indiana canonical	2
Tyson Timbs v. Indiana	1

Statements (46)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	U.S. constitutional law case ⓘ United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
appliesTo	Local governments ⓘ States ⓘ
areaOfLaw	Civil forfeiture law ⓘ Constitutional law ⓘ Criminal procedure ⓘ
argumentHeardDate	November 28, 2018 ⓘ
citation	139 S. Ct. 682 (2019) ⓘ 203 L. Ed. 2d 11 (2019) ⓘ 586 U.S. ___ (2019) ⓘ
concurringOpinionBy	Clarence Thomas ⓘ Neil M. Gorsuch ⓘ surface form: Neil Gorsuch
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted	Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ surface form: Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	February 20, 2019 ⓘ
decisionType	Unanimous decision ⓘ
docketNumber	17-1091 ⓘ
fullName	Timbs v. Indiana self-linksurface differs ⓘ surface form: Tyson Timbs v. Indiana
GorsuchConcurrenceBasis	Agreement with incorporation of Excessive Fines Clause ⓘ
holding	States and localities are subject to the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on excessive fines. ⓘ Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ surface form: The Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause is incorporated against the states under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
impact	Confirmed that all three Eighth Amendment protections are incorporated against the states ⓘ
incorporationDoctrine	Selective incorporation ⓘ
jurisdiction	United States federal question jurisdiction ⓘ
legalIssue	Civil asset forfeiture ⓘ Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ surface form: Eighth Amendment Due Process Clause ⓘ surface form: Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause Incorporation of the Excessive Fines Clause ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ
originatingCourt	Indiana court system ⓘ surface form: Indiana state courts
petitioner	Tyson Timbs ⓘ
precedentFor	Challenges to disproportionate economic sanctions by states ⓘ
publication	United States Reports ⓘ
relatedCase	Austin v. United States ⓘ McDonald v. City of Chicago ⓘ United States v. Bajakajian ⓘ
relatedRight	Protection against excessive fines ⓘ
respondent	Indiana ⓘ surface form: State of Indiana
result	Judgment of the Indiana Supreme Court vacated and remanded ⓘ
stateInvolved	Indiana ⓘ
subjectMatter	Forfeiture of a Land Rover SUV used in drug offenses ⓘ
ThomasConcurrenceBasis	Privileges and Immunities Clause ⓘ surface form: Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
timePeriod	2010s in United States case law ⓘ
vote	9-0 ⓘ

Referenced by (3)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Incorporation doctrine → keyCase → Timbs v. Indiana ⓘ

Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution → centralIssueInCase → Timbs v. Indiana ⓘ

Timbs v. Indiana → fullName → Timbs v. Indiana self-linksurface differs ⓘ

this entity surface form: Tyson Timbs v. Indiana