TexasCHLforum.com

Good news. Long overdue in my opinion.

The idea of civil forfeiture of property associated with a crime might have been of some merit originally, but the process has been severely abused for a very long time now. I am not "soft on crime," but I personally sincerely hope that the Supreme Court puts a stop to this horrible practice and abuse of the Constitution.

Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether the Constitution has anything to say about such civil forfeiture laws, which allow states and localities to take and keep private property used to commit crimes.

“This system — where police can seize property with limited judicial oversight and retain it for their own use — has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses,” he [Justice Clarence Thomas] wrote...

Same NY Times article, linked from two different sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/us/p ... iture.html
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/he ... spartandhp

Glad it is headed to SCOTUS. That NEEDS to be fixed. It is the same issue where persons who have committed no crime but are suspected of one have had large sums of cash seized and never returned.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... story.html

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... forfeiture
(FYI, I typically hate Vox but they are right on this).

thatguyoverthere wrote: Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:51 pm Good news. Long overdue in my opinion.

I agree. Long overdue.

I'm not sure I want to live in a country where my property can be seized by the government with no due process.

I agree. I also believe it's used too often as a way to strong arm those accused. They take away their financial ability to defend themselves.

WildBill wrote: Mon Jun 25, 2018 4:16 pm

thatguyoverthere wrote: Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:51 pm Good news. Long overdue in my opinion.

1+

It’s always telling when the task force cars are looking southbound and not so much north bound.

I am so happy to see this. I went to a talk about a year ago by the Institute for Justice (the law firm bringing this case) and it was an eye opener on the abuse of civil forfeiture. Here's a good article on LI : https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/06/s ... next-term/

I don't think this case is going to solve anything... The appellant got busted for selling drugs.
This case is about excessive fines, not about seizure of property without charges or a conviction.

Unless I misread it..

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/op ... &utm_term=

Seems like a good use of forfeiture funds. Smh.

roadkill wrote: Mon Jun 25, 2018 7:18 pm It’s always telling when the task force cars are looking southbound and not so much north bound.

I've lived near Interstate 10 for most of the past 17 years. Law enforcement won't overlook a shipment of drugs they find coming in, if they do catch it. But they're much more driven to find the cash going out. I've had more than one Sheriff tell me that. I wrote software for law enforcement for years. I had lots of interaction with them. They understand that the drugs off the street are a good thing, but they'll only sit in evidence for a while then be destroyed. But the cash, they get a portion of that. They don't get to keep all of it, some goes up the food chain. But they get to keep enough that it's become part of the budget.

clarionite wrote: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:07 am

roadkill wrote: Mon Jun 25, 2018 7:18 pm It’s always telling when the task force cars are looking southbound and not so much north bound.

I've lived near Interstate 10 for most of the past 17 years. Law enforcement won't overlook a shipment of drugs they find coming in, if they do catch it. But they're much more driven to find the cash going out. I've had more than one Sheriff tell me that. I wrote software for law enforcement for years. I had lots of interaction with them. They understand that the drugs off the street are a good thing, but they'll only sit in evidence for a while then be destroyed. But the cash, they get a portion of that. They don't get to keep all of it, some goes up the food chain. But they get to keep enough that it's become part of the budget.

And therein lies the problem. Anytime anyone is incensed by the outcome, the temptation to influence the outcome is greater. Sometimes much greater. It is a power without corresponding control or restraint. I hope that the SCOTUS case makes it more difficult

I hope they rule that we can't be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. On the other hand, if they rule that suspicion is sufficient, let's just say I'm suspicious of a lot of government officials.