First off, was the “failure to pay dues/fines” a criminal violation, or a civil one?
If it was Criminal:
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of Counsel for his defence.
If it was Civil:
Amendment VII.
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
The value of the house was CERTAINLY over $20.
Shark, good to see you buddy.
Thanks for posting, our Constitution! Amen. I’m sick of morons arguing for stealing a (wo_man’s home over what amounts to very little in dispute, but stealing something ov MAJOR value. Even adjusted for inflation, even the $800, is worth more a sizable amount in 18th century money. We have a right not only to property, but to defend it. Funny some will argue 2nd ammendment rights to protect one’s self, and then argue that a home can be outright stolen in order to “pay for” a tiny debt.
Such contracts would be in violation of the constitution anyway. Contracts don’t trump any right. That’s why 14 years olds can’t get cell phones/sign contracts. You have to know the consequences of signing one. Even so, many contracts people would sign into, are illegal.