Nidal Ahmed Waked Hatum v. United States

This case concerns a money laundering offense in which Petitioner returned all of the money involved, with interest, and no one suffered any harm—financial or otherwise. Petitioner kept nothing, made no proceeds, and was financially unable to pay a fine. After the district court declined to enter a forfeiture judgment, however, the Eleventh Circuit required the district court to authorize forfeiting the total amount of money involved in the transactions—ultimately resulting in a forfeiture money judgment of more than $10 million dollars in unspecified, untainted property. Breaking from its sister circuits and precedent, the Eleventh Circuit found no constitutional or statutory impediment to that result. The questions presented are:

1. Whether, in determining whether a fine contravenes the Excessive Fines Clause, courts may consider the gravity of the underlying offense purely in the abstract or should consider the gravity of the specific defendant’s wrongdoing. This is the same question on which the Court granted certiorari in Jouppi v. State of Alaska, No. 25–246.

2. Whether, in determining whether a fine contravenes the Excessive Fines Clause, courts may ignore the financial status of the defendant.

3. Whether, under 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(1), the government can obtain a forfeiture money judgment for untainted substitute property in the amount of the full value of funds that changed hands during an offense, even if none of the forfeited property was tainted, the defendant never personally received anything, and the full amount was returned to the rightful owner before indictment.