Austin v. United States
E666883
Austin v. United States is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court case that held certain civil forfeitures constitute punishment and are therefore subject to the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Austin v. United States canonical | 1 |
Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Eighth Amendment case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ civil forfeiture case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
civil forfeiture law
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ criminal law ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1992-11-30 ⓘ |
| citation | 509 U.S. 602 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Justice Antonin Scalia
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Excessive Fines Clause NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decidedDate | 1993-06-28 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1993 ⓘ |
| governmentActionChallenged | forfeiture of a mobile home and auto body shop ⓘ |
| holding |
Certain civil forfeitures constitute punishment for purposes of the Eighth Amendment
ⓘ
Civil forfeitures that are at least partially punitive are subject to the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment ⓘ |
| impact |
expanded the scope of the Excessive Fines Clause to include certain civil forfeitures
ⓘ
limited the government’s ability to use civil forfeiture as a punitive measure without Eighth Amendment scrutiny ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Justice Byron R. White NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice David H. Souter NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice Sandra Day O’Connor NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| languageOfDecision | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue | application of the Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause to civil forfeitures ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Justice Harry A. Blackmun NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| originatingCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| page | 602 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Richard Lyle Austin NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| precedentStatus | leading precedent on the Excessive Fines Clause and civil forfeiture ⓘ |
| reasoning |
the Excessive Fines Clause applies to sanctions that are at least partially punitive, even if labeled civil
ⓘ
the historical understanding of forfeiture shows that some forfeitures have been understood as punishment ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Timbs v. Indiana
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
United States v. Bajakajian NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
in rem forfeiture
ⓘ
punitive civil sanction ⓘ |
| reporter | U.S. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| respondent | United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | forfeiture of property used to facilitate drug offenses ⓘ |
| typeOfForfeitureInvolved | civil in rem forfeiture ⓘ |
| volume | 509 ⓘ |
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.