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:
New study interlinks super dust storm, aerosol radiative feedbackXi Jinping meets Ma YingChinese experts showcase new seed varieties, technology at Uganda agricultural exhibitionHong Kong's first satellite manufacturing center launchedChina sees fruitful outcomes in international space cooperationChina announces goodwill delegation to the DPRKBiden to host Iraqi leader as Mideast tensions soar, raising more questions about US troop presenceAnt McPartlin and his pregnant wife AnneScientists develop fully integrated memristor chip with low energy consumptionInside Lily James' idyllic childhood as the daughter of a musician and actress
2.6532s , 6575 kb
Copyright © 2024 Powered by Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property ,Stellar Stand news portal