Plane Seized Over Six-Pack of Beer

Ken Jouppi, a then 72-year-old Alaskan bush pilot, was convicted of a misdemeanor in 2012, when state troopers searched his plane before takeoff, and discovered that a passenger was attempting to bring three cases of beer to her postmaster husband living in a "dry" village where alcohol is prohibited. Jouppi was deemed culpable for just one of the six-packs that troopers said was in plain sight, and served three days in jail, plus a fine.

The state wasn't through with Jouppi. Defying trial court decisions, state prosecutors, for the last 13 years, have sought to seize his Cessna U206D, worth $95,000, through asset forfeiture - which allows police and prosecutors to seize property connected to criminal activity. Seriously? A $95k punishment… for a misdemeanor? Can government get more oppressive?

The man is petitioning the Supreme Court to consider whether the seizure of his plane, over a six-pack, is an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment. Along with the Institute for Justice, he is asking the Supreme Court to rule on whether states should consider the gravity of a defendant's specific offense, rather than an abstract view of the general crime.

"The Excessive Fines Clause of the constitution was built for cases like this. As government agencies increasingly exploit fines and forfeitures to pad their budgets, it's vital that the Supreme Court make clear that the Excessive Fines Clause is a meaningful check on government overreach."

Why has Alaska gone wild on this case? The ruling states, "Alcohol abuse in rural Alaska leads to increased crime; disorders, such as alcoholism; conditions, such as fetal alcohol spectrum disorder; and death, imposing substantial costs on public health and the administration of justice. Within this context, it is clear that the illegal importation of even a six-pack of beer causes grave societal harm. This factor strongly suggests that the forfeiture is not grossly disproportional."

I’m sorry, but yes it is. A six-pack of beer is barely enough to get two people legally drunk for two hours. In this case, the beer was intended for just one person, a husband. This is hardly “grave” societal harm. I don’t blame my local convenience store for displaying freshly baked chocolate-chip cookies for my, or society’s, overweight issues.

In the past, the Supreme Court ruled that while states are bound by the Eighth Amendment, each state court can determine what constitutes an excessive fine. Many states adopted proportionality tests that involve some analysis of personal culpability. The Alaska Supreme Court, however, has focused on the maximum penalties for worst-case offenders of alleged “grave social ills”. Under that insanity, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the forfeiture of Jouppi's plane was not excessive.

To every legislator out there, no matter what state you are from: ills of society can not be legislated away into oblivion. Last century’s Prohibition laws proved that. Unless Alaska can prove the pilot, now 85, had purposeful ill-intent on his mind, Ken Jouppi’s plane needs to remain his.