I could easily see the Court ruling that the clause is incorporated by the 14th Amendment making it applicable to the states, and that the forfeiture needs to be comensurate with the crime, but not entirely disallowing the civil forfeiture process.
That is the type of incrementalism that Roberts likes. How it fits into restraint versus activism is obvious. Ruling on the narrowest grounds is a central tenant of judicial restraint.
This message has been edited 2 time(s).