States Face Restrictions on Property Seizures
SCOTUS unamiously rules states are limited, just as the Federal Government is, by the U.S. Constitution.
WASHINGTON (AP) – The Supreme Court is ruling unanimously that the Constitution’s ban on excessive fines applies to the states. The outcome Wednesday could help an Indiana man recover the $40,000 Land Rover police seized when they arrested him for selling about $400 worth of heroin.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the court’s opinion in favor of Tyson Timbs, of Marion, Indiana. The ruling also could buttress efforts to limit the confiscation by local law enforcement of property belonging to someone suspected of a crime. Police and prosecutors often keep the proceeds.
Ginsburg read a summary of her opinion from the bench. She missed arguments last month, but returned to the bench Tuesday.
(Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
Also reacting today was the Montgomery-based Foundation for Moral Law group headed by former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice:
Foundation President Kayla Moore praised the decision, saying, “The Supreme Court vindicated two important principles today. First, it applied the Constitution consistently. Second, property, like liberty and life, are God-given rights. We believe in law and order, but we also believe that the government cannot abuse the practice of civil asset forfeiture to take that right away.”
Foundation Senior Counsel John Eidsmoe added, “Civil forfeiture is an improper mixture of criminal and civil law. We are thankful that the Court has seen fit to limit this abuse of power.”
And the also Montgomery based Southern Poverty Law Center has made civil forfeiture an issue on their website:
This study found that in half of the 1,110 cases examined in Alabama, the amount of cash involved was $1,372 or less. This suggests that prosecutors have extended the use of civil forfeiture beyond its original intent of pursuing leaders of international drug cartels. And since typical attorney fees add up to well over $1,372 – often running into the thousands for the multiple pleadings and court appearances a civil forfeiture case can entail – this means law enforcement can take these relatively small amounts of money from Alabamians, secure in the knowledge that they will never be asked to return it. Indeed, this study found that in more than half the disposed cases (52 percent), the property owner never attempted to contest the forfeiture, resulting in a default judgment – an easy win – for the state.
