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:
German parliament approves plans to relax strict restrictions on family namesJoel Matip and Thiago Alcantara to leave Liverpool when contracts expire at end of seasonScottie Scheffler is back to business as usual as the World No 1 shoots opening fourMoroccan asylumFamilies of Mexican farmworker bus crash victims mourn the loss of their loved onesScottie Scheffler is back to business as usual as the World No 1 shoots opening fourA mayoral candidate and 5 other people killed in gunfire at a campaign rally in southern MexicoNRA kicks off annual meeting as board considers successor to longtime leader Wayne LaPierreProtect yourself from ticks with these tipsGermany defender Benjamin Henrichs signs contract extension at Leipzig through 2028
3.3653s , 6499.140625 kb
Copyright © 2024 Powered by Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property ,Worldly Window news portal