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:
Feature: Namibian city market bolsters local product commerceHK officials clarify fallacies over legislation of Article 23Xi in My EyesKremlin calls Biden's remarks on Putin unacceptableIsrael lifts all precautionary restrictions after Iranian attack: armyChinese naval hospital ship back home after visit to JakartaChina's stance on nonInterview: Somalia seeks drought relief funding in worst humanitarian crisisWorld Robot Conference 2022 held in BeijingRed Sea crisis mounts pressure on Asia trade
2.5818s , 4668.9296875 kb
Copyright © 2024 Powered by Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property ,Stellar Stories news portal