Will SCOTUS require courts to consider a defendant’s specific wrongdoing in excessive-fines cases?: Will the Supreme Court rule in favor of Kenneth J. Jouppi in Jouppi v. Alaska Before Aug 1, 2028
Price checked at
Probability history
Market-implied probabilities · All recorded historyDrag to move · pinch or ⌘/Ctrl+scroll to zoom
Shaded periods have no successful hourly price check.
Based on this market’s outcome prices, expressed as probabilities.
Resolution rules
If the Supreme Court, in Jouppi v. Alaska, rules courts must consider the gravity of the specific defendant’s wrongdoing, rather than evaluating the underlying offense purely in the abstract, when applying the Excessive Fines Clause, then the market resolves to Yes. The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that, in determining whether a fine contravenes the Excessive Fines Clause, courts must consider the gravity of the specific defendant’s wrongdoing and may not evaluate the gravity of the underlying offense purely in the abstract, after Issuance and before August 1, 2028. A remand accompanied by a merits ruling establishing this requirement resolves to Yes. If the Court holds that courts may assess the offense’s gravity purely in the abstract, dismisses the case, dismisses the writ as improvidently granted, or remands or otherwise disposes of the case without a merits ruling establishing this requirement, the market resolves to No.
Venue activity
Read from the venue this minuteDiscussion on Predxy
What Predxy's readers make of this market. Everyone can read; signed-in readers can write. The venue's own thread, when it has one, is the box below.Sign in to join the discussion.
Nobody has said anything here yet.
As of Sep 30, 12:51 PM UTC