Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property
Time:2024-05-22 11:31:02 Source:worldViews(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:Kansas takes control in the ninth and beats Kansas State in the opener of the Big 12 Tournament
Next:Emma Hayes' first roster as coach of the US women's team includes 2 first
You may also like
- It's so hot in Mexico that howler monkeys are falling dead from the trees
- Teyana Taylor looks fierce in towering platform boots while carrying a jeweled camera
- Afghanistan's only female diplomat resigns in India after gold smuggling allegations
- Alabama court won't revisit frozen embryo ruling
- Bella Thorne puts on a leggy display in a dark red off
- Nicki Minaj surprises Barbz as she brings out Cyndi Lauper to perform Pink Friday Girls in Brooklyn
- The Canucks ready for all
- Heartstopping moment five year
- A Canadian serial killer who brought victims to a pig farm is hospitalized after a prison assault