It seems that there is a case pending in the Supreme Court that may spell and end to civil forfeiture under the 8th Amendment. According to Hit Air and other sources, the Solicitor General of Indiana took a rhetorical beating yesterday over the practice.
I've often wondered about "civil" forfeiture, because they always seem to be the result of a criminal action. And, it seems that the 8th Amendment prohibits excessive fines. I admit that I have never been cognizant of the 8th Amendment, but it seems that it is going to play a big part in the arguments.
This is liable to be interesting.
2 comments:
I would love to see 'civil' forfeitures reigned in. The very interesting things about most forfeitures is that the case is against the item being seized, not the person it was seized from - which means that the person who owned it has to jump through many legal hoops to be able to fight the forfeiture.
Civil Asset Forfeiture without a corresponding criminal conviction is just theft by another name. I'd like to see it stopped completely. Even better would be criminal convictions under the RICO act for a bunch of IRS officials, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials for stealing people's property.
Post a Comment