1. Under Oregon law, in a contested civil forfeiture trial, property may be forfeited only if a jury finds that a person was convicted of a crime, that the property was a proceed or instrumentality of that crime, and that the forfeiture is substantially proportional to the offense. Does such a forfeiture constitute criminal punishment under the Double Jeopardy Clause?

2. Whether this Court's holding in United States v. Ursery, 518 U.S. 267 (1996), that in rem forfeitures do not constitute criminal punishment, is consistent with the text, history, tradition, and original meaning of the Double Jeopardy Clause.

Whether civil forfeiture of property constitutes criminal punishment under the Double Jeopardy Clause and whether United States v. Ursery remains consistent with the text, history, tradition, and original meaning of the Double Jeopardy Clause