But Pacific Legal Foundation does not have an entirely pristine record, as much as I support many of its efforts. I recall attending a fund-raising affair some years ago at which speakers discussed their various sterling efforts. After the public discussions, I asked their legal counsel how they could support seizure of property (forfeitures) by law enforcement so the agencies could get the money/value from the properties taken. He replied something along the line that police and law enforcement are supporters of the PLF, so they don't want to take sides against them.
Take the example just now in the news about the seizure of Duke Cunningham's home, allegedly purchased with money obtained as a bribe. Yes, a grand jury is allegedly hearing evidence against Cunningham, but the feds decided to go ahead and seize his home. Automatically it no longer belongs to Cunningham and he must sue to prove his right of ownership. If he fails, he will never get it back or any part of the money he put into it. Guilt first; charges, trial, etc., later - maybe. That is law in the U.S. affecting ordinary people everyday. In Cunningham's case, it makes the news because he is/was a public figure.