Cite as: 518 U. S. 267 (1996)
Opinion of Stevens, J.
of punishment for misconduct that occurred therein. Consider how drastic the remedy would have been if Congress in 1931 had authorized the forfeiture of every home in which alcoholic beverages were consumed. Under the Court's reasoning, I fear that the label "civil," or perhaps "in rem," would have been sufficient to avoid characterizing such forfeitures as "punitive" for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause. Our recent decisions in Halper, Austin, and Kurth Ranch dictate a far different conclusion. I remain persuaded that those cases were correctly decided and should be followed today.
Accordingly, I respectfully dissent from the judgment in No. 95-345.
321
Page: Index Previous 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55Last modified: October 4, 2007