Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property
Time:2024-05-22 11:11:36 Source:politicsViews(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:Emma Weymouth channels wedding chic in a white gown at Cannes Film Festival
Next:Brewers right
You may also like
- NASCAR star Kyle Larson is embracing his Indianapolis 500 debut, right down to milking a cow
- Tens of thousands of Israelis rally in Tel Aviv demanding Gaza hostage deal
- Alicudi: Italian island offers goats up for adoption
- Russia hits vast dam in war's largest strike on Ukrainian energy infrastructure, Kyiv says
- Massey, Perez hit homers to lead Royals in 8
- Environmentally
- 'Hardest Geezer' Russell Cook completes almost year
- Food price hikes stall, thanks to lowered cost of fruit and veges
- Testimony at Sen. Bob Menendez's bribery trial focuses on his wife's New Jersey home