WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that authorities do not have to provide a quick hearing when they seize cars and other property used in drug crimes, even when the property belongs to so-called innocent owners.
By a 6-3 vote, the justices rejected the claims of two Alabama women who had to wait more than a year for their cars to be returned. Police had stopped the cars when they were being driven by other people and, after finding drugs, seized the vehicles.
Civil forfeiture allows authorities to take someone’s property, without having to prove that it has been used for illicit purposes. Critics of the practice describe it as “legalized theft.”
Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the conservative majority that a civil forfeiture hearing to determine whether an owner will lose the property permanently must be timely. But he said the Constitution does not also require a separate hearing about whether police may keep cars or other property in the meantime.
Related articles:
Related suggestion:
Kentucky governor predicts trip to Germany and Switzerland will reap more business investmentsAlvarez and Munguia unusually polite to each other leading up to allFrom your alarm clock and mattress to your microwave and fridgeIowa investigator's email says athlete gambling sting was a chance to impress higherA committee finds a decayed and broken utility pole caused the largest wildfire in Texas historyPeter Oosterhuis, Ryder Cup stalwart and CBS announcer, dies at 75Home appliance giant Midea reports 10 pct revenue increase in Q1The truth about 'fake meat' and why Martin Freeman was right about ultraAlvarez and Munguia unusually polite to each other leading up to allFilm executives on developing IPs and reaching global audiences
3.2978s , 6497.859375 kb
Copyright © 2024 Powered by Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property ,Earth Edges news portal