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:
Chinese traditional music charms Maltese audienceRecord foreign visitors to Japan reported in FebruaryIsrael vows 'appropriate response' if Iran attacks its territoryChina's top political advisory body holds 3rd plenary meeting of annual sessionGENERAL JACOB NAGEL: Why Israel's failure to strike back at Iran could lead to NUCLEAR WARAt least five injured in ballistic missile attack on Ukrainian capitalCapitals beat the Bruins 2China to launch construction, expansion of major cultural facilitiesNew book chronicles ecological civilization along Lijiang RiverTJ Maxx job applicant really wants to to work at the store
3.7135s , 6498.265625 kb
Copyright © 2024 Powered by Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property ,World Weave news portal