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.
Vermont governor vetoes bill to restrict pesticide that is toxic to bees, saying it's anti
Tipping etiquette: Your questions answered
Sagging bridge ‘warning shot’ work needed
Hurricanes Poua won't be allowed to repeat haka criticising government
Tagovailoa misses Dolphins' OTA day to attend Saban's charity golf tournament
China celebrates 100 years of Communist Party
How hard is it to land an airliner in a crosswind
Māori communities must be at forefront of emergency management plans, hapū say
Thousands of fans come to see Nadal practice ahead of the French Open
Rare PINK elephant is captured playing in a South African waterhole