For years, the county clobbered property owners with fines of “$10,000 or more per day for offenses they did not commit,” reports the Institute for Justice, which has represented several of the harassed residents.
More than 1,200 property owners in Humboldt County, California, were hit with such fines for growing pot despite only one form of evidence: old satellite images of their property. Followed by, often, no
Among the victims: Corrine and Doug Thomas, whom the county charged more than a million dollars. They were also supposed to pay $200,000 to demolish a barn near their home because a prior owner had grown marijuana there. Another owner, Blu Graham, tried in 2018 to get a hearing to show that his greenhouses contained vegetables, not marijuana. As he waited year after year, the fines piled up.
Finally, in 2022, these and others targeted by the county sued in federal court with IJ’s help.
After some ups and downs, a court of appeals affirmed the plausibility of the plaintiffs’ claims, and the prospect of a trial motivated county officials to settle.
The county has withdrawn the fines, retracted the arbitrary allegations, and agreed to give owners 30 days warning in which to counter an accusation before the county acts further. No fines are to be levied until a case is decided. New owners cannot be punished for what previous owners did. Etc.
And the county must pay the plaintiffs’ litigation costs.
This is Common Sense. Let’s hope it sticks.
I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with Nano Banana
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts
5 replies on “Humbled in Humboldt County”
I’m curious about how the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors voted at various stages of the process. The Board has a Democratic majority, but the general history of the Republican Party has been very poor where due process for those at all associated with drug crimes is concerned, so the abuse may have had bipartisan support.
Having the county corporation pay the legal fees is better than leaving the immediate victims on the hook. Real justice would make the various officials behind these actions pay those costs.
Just how such possibilities would affect the behavior of officials is unclear. In some cases, they would be quicker to do the right thing, for fear of personal financial consequences; in other cases, they might feel that their only chances of avoiding financial ruin would lie in going for broke.
If I am your only respondent, you are doing something wrong! Why not writing about farmers going bankrupt due to tariffs? Anything Trump does!
Pam, as you’ve been told repeatedly, comments aren’t continuously checked. My comment was idling in the moderation queue even as you were commenting. Sometimes my comments idle for most of a day.
And if you want yet another ‘blog about nothing but the real or imagined failings of Donald Trump, then you ought to create it, instead of badgering Paul to turn his ‘blog to that mission. Since you are a great fan of LLMs, you could have one generate all the anti-Trump content for you, if you didn’t feel up to writing it yourself.
And the county must pay the plaintiffs’ litigation costs. And then the county will raise everyone’s taxes (including the plaintiffs’) even more to cover the expense.
Pat, I don’t think that a government taxes much-if-any less when it is not sued. Government takes what it can. Lawsuits may make a government think that it can tax a bit more on an excuse of having to pay for a suit, but then again the officials involved may fear that they will lose their positions if taxes are increased to pay for what are plainly the sins of these officials.