Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property
Time:2024-05-22 11:16:08 Source:entertainmentViews(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:Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property
Next:Hush money trial: Trump witness Costello back on the stand after admonishment
You may also like
- China sanctions former US lawmaker who supported Taiwan
- Journalists critical of their own companies cause headaches for news organizations
- San Jose mayor's security detail fights off pedestrian in the middle of TV interview as entire four
- Taraji P. Henson the busty bombshell blows a kiss on red carpet at star
- New Zealand Black Caps fans look to Twenty20 World Cup with hope, trepidation
- Ukraine pulls US
- Experts share new achievements in Turfan studies
- Man admits to being gunman who carjacked woman in case involving drugs and money, affidavit says
- Weather forecasters warn Pakistanis to stay indoors ahead of new heat wave