Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when police seize property
Time:2024-05-22 11:26:09 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:Brazilian coach Sylvinho sworn in as Albanian citizen ahead of Euro 2024
Next:Trial of Sen. Bob Menendez takes a weeklong break after jurors get stuck in elevator
You may also like
- Lady Tatiana Mountbatten
- Bulgaria, Romania to join Schengen area
- Mushroom mania fuels tourism innovation
- Xi to Attend Opening Ceremony of Chengdu Universiade
- Cunningham throws six scoreless, Vanderbilt defeats Florida 6
- Highlights of CBA 5th round match
- Over 500 rescuers rush to put out forest fire in southwest China
- Chinese athletes prepare for Tokyo Olympics amid challenges
- Receiver Tank Dell practices with Texans less than a month after being wounded in shooting