Can the Excessive Fines Clause Mitigate the LFO Crisis? An Assessment of the Caselaw

By Michael O’Hear. Full Text.

The nation’s increasing use of fees, fines, forfeiture, and restitution has resulted in chronic debt burdens for millions of poor and working-class Americans. These legal financial obligations (LFOs) likely entrench racial and socioeconomic divides and contribute to the breakdown of trust in the police and courts in disadvantaged communities. One possible source of restraint on LFOs may be the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment. Largely ignored by courts and commentators for two centuries, the Clause has in recent years been the subject of a burgeoning volume of litigation and scholarship. The U.S. Supreme Court has decided a handful of Excessive Fines Clause cases but has left a great many questions about the Clause’s reach unanswered. Lower courts are now regularly grappling with these open questions, giving rise to an ever-growing body of caselaw. This Article offers the first systematic survey and evaluation of the caselaw on what counts as a “fine” for Eighth Amendment purposes, particularly in relation to the major categories of LFOs. Based on an assessment of nearly 200 cases, important interjurisdictional variations are apparent. In a few states, expansive understandings of the Clause’s reach are becoming established, which may create a foundation for robust constitutional regulation of LFOs. In most states, though, the precedent is either less favorable or simply still too undeveloped to see a clear trajectory. The Article further identifies seven key, open doctrinal questions that cut across the LFO categories and will likely determine the extent to which the full range of LFOs will be subject to the Clause.