2024-04-03 PL-CCI-2024-000003 Bill 121 Robert Henry Testimony

Home

From: Robert Henry To: W PCtesti mono Subject: Written Opposition to Bill 121 Date: Wednesday,April 3,2024 11:55:25 PM Re: Constitutional Opposition to Proposed TAR Bill 121 Due to Violation of the Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause and the Hawaii Constitution Section 12's Excessive Fine Clause. Aloha Council Members, The blatant violation of both Section 12 of the Hawaiian Constitution and the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution's prohibition against excessive fines by TAR Bill 121 carries significant legal consequences and must be stopped immediately. The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." This clause serves as a safeguard against governmental abuse of power and ensures that penalties imposed for regulatory offenses are proportionate to the gravity of the offense and the culpability of the offender. In analyzing the constitutionality of Bill 121, it is essential to consider the principles articulated by the Supreme Court in its landmark decision in Timbs v. Indiana. In Timbs, the Court held that the Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause applies to state and municipal actions, reaffirming the fundamental principle that the government may not impose fines that are grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the offense. When applying these principles to the provisions of Bill 121, it is apparent that the fines stipulated therein are undeniably excessive and disproportionate to the minor offenses. TAR owners would be subject to fines of $10,000 per day for minor infractions such as exceeding occupancy limits, improper parking, noise disturbances during designated quiet hours, or inadequately sized signage. Such penalties are not only punitive but also serve no legitimate purpose other than to impose financial hardship and deterrence of TAR ownership. Moreover, recent legal precedents, such as Tyler v. Hennepin