It likely doesn't. My assumption would be that those seizures would have already had to pass the constitutional muster because they were federal cases. This is

It likely doesn't. My assumption would be that those seizures would have already had to pass the constitutional muster because they were federal cases. This is simply the SC stating that they interpret the constitution as being the law of the land, and that the states can't be more punitive than the feds. That money will still be there.