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. |
Vertex Pharma scientist talks about the long road to developing nonPolice declare Sydney church stabbing a terror attack 'motivated by religious extremism'NBA attendance: League says 71% of games this season were selloutsChina handles nearly 5.19 mln entryChina activates LevelDR MAX PEMBERTON: Why Joe Wicks is WRONG about diet and the real reason children are getting ADHDWomen's soccer coach accused of sexual harassment in Brazil resigns after protestsBudimir misses unforgettable lastDonald Trump brings his campaign to the courthouse as his criminal hush money trial beginsShanghai airports see surge in inbound foreign travelers in Q1