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.
I'm a vet and you should beware of these 4 garden plants that are harmful to dogs
Myanmar: Civilian casualties rise as resistance forces tighten noose around military
Inside 'billionaire' gypsy Alfie Best's family
Japanese defense aircraft makes emergency landing after window glitch. No injuries were reported
I'm a vet and you should beware of these 4 garden plants that are harmful to dogs
Wimbledon girls finalist suspended for doping on pro tour
West Virginia lawmakers approve funding to support students due to FAFSA delays
Emma Weymouth channels wedding chic in a white gown at Cannes Film Festival
Proud Lionness! Mary Earps beams as she's honoured by William