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:
The Piano review: This show's standout performer? A romantic OAP with dementia, writes ROLAND WHITEArabic edition of Xi Jinping: The Governance of China promoted in CairoPalestinian death toll in Gaza rises to 34,388: MinistryHamas announces openness to any proposals for a permanent ceasefireTwo Iraqi military bases bombed by unknown aircraft near BaghdadRussia says Moscow terror attack suspects planned to flee to Kiev for rewardArabic edition of Xi Jinping: The Governance of China promoted in CairoNew York judge rejects Trump's request to delay hush money trialTaylor Swift celebrates the success of The Tortured Poets Department with behindArabic edition of Xi Jinping: The Governance of China promoted in Cairo
2.719s , 6499.2109375 kb
Copyright © 2024 Powered by Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property ,Global Gazette news portal