Law Center Search Results

On September 10, 2026, the NAM filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court urging the Court to find that monetary penalties must reflect the severity of an offender's specific actions, not the general nature of the offense. In Jouppi v. Alaska, an individual flew his passenger plane carrying a six-pack of beer to a "dry" village in Alaska. In his prosecution, an Alaska trial court obtained criminal forfeiture of the airplane, valued around $100,000. The Alaska Supreme Court upheld this penalty against an Excessive Fines defense, concluding it was justified based on the "grave societal harm" caused by alcohol abuse in rural Alaska. Our amicus brief argues the Alaska Supreme Court wrongly assessed a penalty for the societal harm caused by the broader implications of the defendant's actions rather than the harm directly caused by his own conduct. In government enforcement actions, courts may not use the harm caused by widespread social or environmental trends and phenomena to determine the amount of a penalty.