Source: Cato Institute
by Matthew Cavedon
“[O]n Thursday, a New York appellate court, citing that clause, struck down a $500 million fine against the president for filing dishonest business records. Regardless of whether Trump’s case was decided rightly or wrongly, it isn’t typical, and focus on it threatens to obscure the clause’s role in protecting everyday Americans. Blackstone had much more modest circumstances in mind when he wrote that fines could not deprive landowners of their land, merchants of their businesses, or farmers of their animals and equipment. A court imposing a fine had to recognize that what ‘is ruin to one man’s fortune, may be matter of indifference to another’s’ and adjust the amount accordingly. We should all be thankful that such a clause exists and that it prohibits excessive fines — even if in addition to protecting people with average assets, it also protects people with great fortunes.” (08/26/25)