POLITICS
Supreme Court of the United States
Can pilot lose plane for bootlegging 6-pack? Supreme Court to decide
The Alskan pilot said the Supreme Court needs to clarify when a fine is excessive under the Constitution.
Maureen GroppeUSA TODAY
Updated July 20, 2026, 8:34 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON – A six-pack of Budweiser could cost an Alaskan pilot his $95,000 plane unless the Supreme Court agrees the punishment doesn’t fit the crime.
The court on July 20 said it would hear the pilot’s argument that surrendering his Cessna U206D to the government after he illegally tried to fly beer into a village where alcohol is banned amounts to an excessive fine under the Constitution.
Ken Jouppi, a longtime bush pilot in his 80s, said he’s been fighting his case for more than a decade, not just so he can keep the plane he uses for his one-man air-taxi service.
“I see it as my duty to ensure that the Bill of Rights actually means something in protecting against government overreach,” he said in a statement.
The trial judge found Jouppi chose to ignore the ban on alcohol imposed by the village of Beaver, Alaska, when he attempted to fly a passenger to the community in 2012. The passenger had a six-pack of beer in a plastic grocery bag.
Because of the state’s “unique difficulties in combating alcohol abuse” and because many communities are accessible primarily by air, the state legislature said airplanes used to illegally import alcohol can be seized
The Alaska Supreme Court backed the seizure even after assuming Jouppi’s version of the disputed facts in the case was correct, Cox told the court.
“We hold that the forfeiture does not violate the Excessive Fines Clause because it is not grossly disproportional to the gravity of the harm caused by Jouppi’s alcohol importation offense,” the Alaska Supreme Court said.
But Jouppi’s attorney said it’s “past time for the Supreme Court to clarify what makes a fine excessive.”
“As government agencies increasingly exploit fines and forfeitures to pad their budgets, it’s vital that the Supreme Court make clear that the Excessive Fines Clause is a meaningful check on government overreach, said Sam Gedge, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, which represents Jouppi.
The court will hear the case in the term that begins in October and is expected to issue a decision by next July.
