Of late, very little unites the conservative and liberal wings of the U.S. Supreme Court. However, in Timbs v. Indiana, 586 U.S. ___, 139 S.Ct. 682 (Feb. 20, 2019), the court unanimously held in favor of Tyson Timbs, a convicted heroin dealer faced with losing his $42,000 automobile under Indiana’s civil forfeiture law.

The specific issue in Timbs was whether the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause is an incorporated protection applicable to the states under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The question arose following the seizure of Timbs’ Land Rover pursuant to an Indiana civil forfeiture statute authorizing the forfeiture of vehicles used to “transport or … facilitate the transportation of” a controlled substance. Ind. Code §34-24-1-1. Timbs pled guilty to dealing a controlled substance and conspiracy to commit theft, and it was alleged that the Land Rover had been used to transport heroin in connection with his criminal activity. Timbs, 139 S.Ct. at 686.