Does the government violate the Takings Clause when it confiscates property worth more than the debt owed by the owner?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Under Nebraska’s tax sale scheme, the state stole the full value of Sandra K. Nieveen’s home by allowing a private investor to take title after paying Nieveen’s back taxes and penalties. Nieveen, an elderly woman who suffers from physical and mental disabilities, owed $3,796; her home was worth $61,900. The Nebraska Supreme Court summarily rejected Nieveen’s claims under the Takings Clause and Excessive Fines Clause under the analysis in Continental Resources v. Fair, 311 Neb. 184 (2022). A petition for writ of certiorari in Fair is pending before this Court, docket no. 22-160, and the questions presented in this case are identical: 1. Does the government violate the Takings Clause when it confiscates property worth more than the debt owed by the owner? 2. Does the forfeiture of far more property than needed to satisfy a delinquent tax debt plus interest, penalties, and costs constitute an excessive fine within the meaning of the Eighth Amendment? ii LIST OF ALL PARTIES Petitioner Sandra K. Nieveen was the appellant in the Nebraska Supreme Court and Nebraska Court of Appeals and the plaintiff in the trial court. Respondents are TAX 106, a Nebraska general partnership; Vintage Management, LLC, a Nebraska limited liability company; Rachel Garver, Lancaster County Treasurer, in her official capacity; Lancaster County, a political subdivision of the State of Nebraska; and Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General of the State of Nebraska, in his official capacity. All were named defendants in the trial court and appellees in the Nebraska Court of Appeals and Nebraska Supreme Court. STATEMENT OF