Finally a SCOTUS ruling that makes all the sense in the world. Although I would argue it doesn't go far enough and should not only be based on the 8th and 14th Amendments but on the 5th and 9th as well. Supreme Court Rules Unanimously to Limit Civil Forfeiture Laws The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday to limit civil forfeiture laws that give state and local law enforcement the ability to seize property involved in crimes. The move was made in a ruling that states the Eighth Amendment, which bars “excessive fines” on the federal level, also applies to state and local governments. The case was brought to the courts by Tyson Timbs, who plead guilty to selling a couple hundred dollars worth of heroin in 2013. Timbs was sentenced to one year of house arrest and five years of probation, plus $1,200 in fees and fines. The police had also seized his $42,000 Land Rover, which Timbs was driving when he was arrested. Timbs argued that the loss of his car was excessive considering the maximum fine he could face was $10,000. In an opinion authored by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, recently returned from undergoing surgery related to lung cancer, the Supreme Court ruled that the ban on excessive fines applies to states under the 14th Amendment. The Court had previously ruled that excessive fines can include property seizure, according to the New York Times. “The historical and logical case for concluding that the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Excessive Fines Clause is indeed overwhelming,” wrote Gingsburg. Read the rest ... https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/supreme-court-rules-unanimously-limit-204022952.html IMO the 5th and 9th Amendments prohibit ALL civil forfeiture laws, except in cases where the property seized is stolen property or otherwise acquired illegally. In that case, the stolen property should be returned to the owner, obviously.