Skip to content
Bramble

US

Supreme Court to hear Alaska pilot's excessive-fines case; columnist cites other penalties

A syndicated opinion column by John Stossel says the US Supreme Court will hear an excessive-fines case from Alaska, and lists other large penalties in California. The coverage is one column, run by two right-leaning outlets.

2 outlets · 0L · 0C · 2R First reported Account updated
Image: Reason
Image: Hot Air

1 / 2

The story, neutrally told

Right · 2The US Supreme Court will hear a case about excessive fines brought by Ken Jouppi, an Alaska pilot, according to a column by John Stossel. The column says one of several excessive-fine cases has reached the court. Right · 2Jouppi flew in Alaska for 30 years. State troopers stopped his plane before takeoff, searched it and found beer in a passenger's groceries. Some Alaska towns ban beer, and Jouppi was convicted of bootlegging. Right · 2Alaskan officials say the beer was visible, so Jouppi should have known about it. They jailed him for three days and seized his plane. His lawyer, Mike Greenberg of the Institute for Justice, says Jouppi has fought for 14 years to keep the plane, which still sits on a tarmac.

Right · 2The column also describes retired professor Tuncay Saydam. It says the IRS demands more than $400,000 over a missed one-page form about an old bank account in Turkey, although his unpaid tax is under $30,000. It says a California court upheld the penalty. Judge Donna Ryu wrote that the government "suffered a significant tax loss." Right · 2In Humboldt County, California, officials used aerial photos to look for unlicensed marijuana farms and fined owners of greenhouses. Blu Graham says the fine was $900,000, at $30,000 a day, for growing vegetables. Greenberg says no marijuana was found on the property. The column says a lawsuit led the county to promise to end its fine system. Right · 2Greenberg argues that governments keep heavy fines because they bring in money, since prosecutors and troopers keep the proceeds. Stossel writes that he invited the judges and government lawyers to explain the fines in his video and none agreed. He says he hopes the Supreme Court will stop the abuses.

Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on. The pill in front of each says where its sources sit: Left, Centre or Right when one side supplies at least half of them, Mixed when they are evenly split. The number is how many outlets it cites.

Left0 outlets

No left outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.

Centre0 outlets

No centre outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.

Right2 outlets

Framing
Opinion column that presents excessive fines as government overreach against ordinary people, and welcomes the Supreme Court case as a possible remedy.
Emphasis
Individual hardship stories, the profit motive behind fines, and the Institute for Justice lawyer's account.
Leaves out or plays down
Neither version gives the case name, a hearing date or the legal question before the court. Neither gives the government's legal arguments beyond Alaska's point that the beer was visible and a judge's quoted line on the tax loss. The only government voices are those two brief quotes, and officials declined to be interviewed.
Charged language
“act like tyrants”“ruinous fine system”“abusive system”“Protection Racket Media”
For example
“It happens because some bureaucrats, savoring their power, act like tyrants.” — Reason
“It's an abusive system because they have every incentive to continue to prosecute.” — Hot Air

Ask about this story

Loading…