Civil and Human Rights

RELEASE: Victory For The Constitution: Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Protections Apply to States

“Today marks a milestone in the 228-year history of the Bill of Rights.” — CAC Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod

WASHINGTON – On news this morning that the U.S. Supreme Court held that the protections of the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause apply to the states, Constitutional Accountability Center Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod issued the following statement:

Today marks a milestone in the 228-year history of the Bill of Rights. As should have been the case since the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on the imposition of excessive fines now applies to state governments no less than it does to the federal government.

Justice Ginsburg’s masterful opinion for the Court echoes key sections of our brief in recounting the history leading to the drafting of the Fourteenth Amendment—including the racist Black Codes that used draconian fines to punish and subjugate African Americans for petty crimes—and explains why the Constitution prohibits the states from meting out the kind of penalty borne by Tyson Timbs.

Significantly, this case has united progressives and conservatives—both advocates and the Justices themselves—in a shared understanding of the original meaning of the Constitution.

#

Resources:

CAC brief in support of petitioners in Timbs v. Indiana: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/timbs-v-indiana/

CAC cert-stage brief in support of petitioners in Timbs v. Indianahttps://www.theusconstitution.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Timbs-CAC-Brief.pdf

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit the new CAC website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
April 19, 2024

Will the Supreme Court Uphold the 14th Amendment and Block an Oregon Law Criminalizing Homelessness?

Nearly 38 million Americans live in poverty. In some areas and among some populations, entrenched economic...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
April 18, 2024

DEI critics were hoping that the Supreme Court’s Muldrow decision would undermine corporate diversity programs. It does no such thing

Fortune
The Supreme Court just delivered a big win for workers and workplace equality–but conservatives are...
Civil and Human Rights
April 17, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court Decision Today Is Important Win for Workers

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Muldrow v. City of...
By: Brianne J. Gorod
Civil and Human Rights
April 15, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court should accept broad agreement among civil rights plaintiff, police, and the federal government in malicious prosecution case

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Chiaverini v....
Civil and Human Rights
April 5, 2024

Supreme Court Divides Gavin Newsom and Progressives

Newsweek
An upcoming Supreme Court case has divided Democratic California Governor Gavin Newsom and progressives. Nearly 90 amicus briefs...
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson

In Grants Pass v. Johnson, the Supreme Court is considering whether city ordinances that punish the status of being homeless impose “cruel and unusual punishment” in violation of the Eighth Amendment.