Understand the "loophole" in the law that allowed a simple infraction to snowball unpayable in the United States
Sandy Martinez, a resident of Lantana, Florida, faces a legal and financial impasse that puts her family assets at risk. She accumulates a debt of more than US$ 165,000 (about R$ 990 thousand) with the municipality, resulting mainly from infractions for parking vehicles on the grass of her own residence. The city points to violations of codes of conduct that prohibit parking in unpaved areas, turning the case into a national symbol of the debate over disproportionate administrative charges in the United States.
SEE ALSO:
The origin of the exorbitant amount lies in the application of daily and cumulative fines. Since 2021, Martinez has been penalized $250 (approximately R$1,500) per day. Of the total of US$ 165 thousand, more than US$ 100 thousand (about R$ 600 thousand) refers exclusively to irregular parking — the rest involves minor infractions, such as damage to the fence and cracks in the sidewalk.
The situation generated financial immobility for the family. Martinez, a single mother who shares the house with her sister and children, argues that the property has a small garage, which forced her to use part of the lawn to accommodate the family’s four vehicles. With the debt recorded, she is prevented from selling the property.
The case suffered a decisive setback recently, when the Florida Supreme Court refused the request to review the case, upholding the penalties imposed by the lower courts. The Institute for Justice, the organization that took over Sandy’s defense, maintains that the amount violates the Excessive Fines Clause of the 8th Amendment of the US Constitution.
The defense argues that there is a dangerous “legal vacuum”. Although the Constitution prohibits disproportionate punishments, Florida courts have interpreted that if the individual daily fine ($250) is deemed reasonable, the amount accumulated — even if it reaches millionaire figures — would not be unconstitutional.
This interpretation is based on local precedents, such as the Suzi case, where a resident was fined $30,000 per tall gram. Without a precise federal definition of what constitutes an “excessive” fine in the aggregate, local governments continue to apply sanctions that critics say amount to thinly veiled confiscation of property.
