Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property
Time:2024-05-22 11:10:24 Source:healthViews(143)
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.
Previous:EU seals a deal on using profits from frozen Russian assets to help arm Ukraine
Next:A woman has died in a storm in Serbia after a tree fell on her car
You may also like
- Iran: Thousands mourn President Raisi and others killed in helicopter crash
- Outrage as pro
- The EU's executive decides to end legal standoff with Poland over democracy concerns
- Polish prosecutors open investigation after judge flees to autocratic Belarus
- Hundreds of hostages, mostly women and children, are rescued from Boko Haram extremists in Nigeria
- Turkey says it has carried out new airstrikes against Kurdish militants in northern Iraq
- Travis Kelce parties at star
- Woman reveals horror of being sexually abused by her cousin's fiancé, 26, when she was 12 years old
- Lindor goes 0