Wed, 14 Oct 2009

Supreme Court to hear case on property seized in drug busts

There's another word for "asset forfeiture".

Theft.

But the people suing aren't arguing about that - oh no. It just took too long:

Chicago lawyer Thomas Peters, who represents the owners of the property in the case, says his clients are not attacking the federal forfeiture scheme or the government's right to impound and forfeit property. "Respondents only insist they are entitled to a prompt, interim hearing before an objective decisionmaker to check against potential bias and overreaching," Mr. Peters writes.

Maybe they need to read the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The plaintiffs are not criminals - no charges have ever been filed. Yet they were deprived of property. I'm sure some smartass lawyer would argue that "but they've had due process in the forfeiture process!". OK, so does that mean the government can deprive you of life for any reason it sees fit, as long as it provides you with "due process"?

Further, their private property was seized for public uses - and they weren't compensated. Except with bureaucratic snafus and red tape.

I call "Bullshit!"

Theft is theft. Time for it to stop. If our judges won't enforce justice, at some point in time the people will.

When in the course of human events ...

The Supreme Court Wednesday looks at whether Chicago officials took too long to return property seized in drug busts to owners who turned out to be innocent.

(link) [Christian Science Monitor | Top Stories]

/Politics | 0 writebacks | permanent link

comment...

 
Notes: If you put a <mailto:> link in the URL field your address will not be mangled: this could be a bad idea as your email address could be easily harvested by bots designed for SPAM. The comments field should now format correctly for line feeds and carriage returns: when you hit the 'Enter' or 'Return' keys in your comment it should break to a new line. The text should wrap cleanly. Please let me know if it doesn't. No HTML tags will pass through - entering links seems to be the main cause of comment SPAM. Also, please be sure that Javascript is enabled in your browser before attempting to post a writeback. Sorry for any inconvenience, but this really helps cut down on the amount of comment SPAM I have to deal with.
 
 Name:
 URL:(optional)
 Title: (optional)
 Comments:  
Save my Name and URL/Email for next time