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:
Farewell to British hero James Kirby: Military veteranDeliveroo transports food to customers in west London on penny farthing bicycle from 1880sRobert Fico: Slovakian leader is in stable but serious condition, hospital saysTrio leads Nashville to 2State Department removes Cuba from short list of countries deemed uncooperative on counterterrorismFacemasks haven't stopped people getting Covid since February 2022, research showsJust Stop Oil ecoMeals on wheels! Inside London's amazing fineBeaming Charles hobnobs with Tess Daly, Sir Lenny Henry and supermodel Rosie HuntingtonFacemasks haven't stopped people getting Covid since February 2022, research shows
1.8361s , 6491.3359375 kb
Copyright © 2024 Powered by Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property ,Global Gatherings news portal