> "several states have created an entirely novel phylum of law: the civil violation of a criminal prohibition."
I've always wondered. If these things are civil trials isn't it unconstitutional for the traffic court to have a sign saying "you don't have a right to a jury" (as it does in SF)? The constitution guarantees a right to a jury trial in all civil cases with a penalty greater than $20.
But that was $20 back when the Constitution was written. Adjusted for inflation [1] and you could be looking at anywhere from $390 (CPI) to $941,000 (relative share of GDP). I have no idea how that is applied today.
I don't see where it says "corrected for inflation" in the Constitution. If the government wants to, by policy, devalue the dollar and make it easier to claim jury rights in civil cases, that is its own fault.
I've always wondered. If these things are civil trials isn't it unconstitutional for the traffic court to have a sign saying "you don't have a right to a jury" (as it does in SF)? The constitution guarantees a right to a jury trial in all civil cases with a penalty greater than $20.