Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property
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
Supreme Court: CFPB funding doesn't violate Constitution
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a conservative-led attack that could have u2024-05-22Atletico boss Simeone sweating on Griezmann fitness
Atletico Madrid forward Antoine Griezmann is a serious doubt for next week's Copa del Rey semifi2024-05-22Maui Fire Department to release after
HONOLULU (AP) — The Maui Fire Department is expected to release a report Tuesday detailing how the a2024-05-22Abu Dhabi welcomes more MICE visitors from China
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) capital Abu Dhabi is spearheading efforts to tap into the potential o2024-05-22- SANTA CLARA, Calif. (AP) — The San Francisco 49ers began their on-field work in the offseason with a2024-05-22
- Alec Baldwin may be sweating heavily after Rust armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed's maximum sentence on2024-05-22
atest comment