Posted on 02/20/2019 10:16:32 AM PST by NRx
WASHINGTON — Siding with a small time drug offender in Indiana whose $42,000 Land Rover was seized by law enforcement officials, the Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that the Constitution places limits on civil forfeiture laws that allow states and localities to take and keep private property used to commit crimes.
Civil forfeiture is a popular way to raise revenue, and its use has been the subject of widespread criticism across the political spectrum.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Eighth Amendment, which bars “excessive fines,” limits the ability of the federal government to seize property. On Wednesday, the court ruled that the clause also applies to the states.
Previously, the Supreme Court had never squarely addressed that question. It had addressed the status of the Excessive Fines Clause, but only in the context of the federal government. The court had, however, previously ruled that most protections under the Bill of Rights apply to the states — or were incorporated against them, in the legal jargon — under the 14th Amendment, one of the post-Civil War amendments.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for eight justices, said the question was an easy one. “The historical and logical case for concluding that the 14th Amendment incorporates the Excessive Fines Clause is overwhelming,” she wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
If you take the premise that the constitution means what it says, as many of us do, then a 36% unanimous decision rate since 2000 is horrible.
El Chapo got to the court
Not likely...remember this?
I was being sarcastic
And because Bubba owned the truck he will also be charged as an accomplice. Bubba will be forced to plea bargain and end up doing time because now he can’t even sell that truck to pay for legal representation.
There is a chain of actions that can happen with all this.
So, according to Notorious RBG, we can’t use El Chapo’s ill-gotten BILLIONS to help build the Wall?
Got it! *SPIT*
The joke here is RBG wring the opinion. That did not happen.
Ginsberg READ the decision. She was not present for the deliberations, or arguments, so she did not PARTICIPATE in the decision.
The arguments were heard last November before her latest surgery. She was a full participant.
Unanimous.
Pretty clear that states and local LEO have been acting criminally for decades.
Against YOU.
“It was 9-0
Thomas wrote his own concurring opinion”
_____________
Justice Thomas concurred in the judgment, but did not sign on to the Opinion of the Court, so, legally speaking, it was 9-0 *on the judgment*, but it was only 8-0 *on the opinion*.
Was the gallery open? How long were they in session?
All I commented about was what the NYT “said”.
I don’t trust ComDems, period. And that includes their mouth pieces at the NYT.
The last time the NYT showed a picture of RBG, it was identified as a 2 month old photo.
Has there been another news report about the subject?
You were saying the arguments were already written before the latest session which included RBG.
If found this article in NPR, certainly another leftist source.
Justice Ginsburg Appears Strong In First Appearance At Supreme Court This Year
And Nina Totenberg, who wrote it is certainly long term liberal.
At her return for Tuesday's arguments, Ginsburg was the first to ask a question in a patent case that normally would have drawn no press attention. Instead, the press rows were nearly full. At the end of the argument, Ginsburg got up carefully. As she descended the steps behind the bench, Chief Justice John Roberts walked next to her, ready to help. But Ginsburg walked on her own.
As luck would have it, after the January arguments, the court had scheduled a monthlong “writing break,” allowing Ginsburg extra time to recuperate and work from home. Last Friday, Ginsburg returned to the Supreme Court building for the first time to participate in the justices’ private conference, the first such conference scheduled since mid-January.
Ginsburg has been working hard to regain her strength. Friends say she is walking more than a mile a day and is once again working out with her trainer twice a week.
Tuesday’s arguments were not about the Indiana seizure case. The results of today’s cases will be announced months from now. That’s the way the SC works except for emergencies.
Timbs v. Indian was argued last November 28. Ginsburg’s surgery was late December. The decision was made official today.
OK that makes sense. But it does not track to the tone of the article. The one posted nor the one that I referenced from NPR.
Yes.
In my view, the problem as in all things American, is carrying the forfeiture to extreme and applied in every case. It seems the fruit of criminal enterprise is declared to be everything the police can find and no judge will call them on it.
That is, the process has gotten out of hand.
This is good news indeed.
/s
It was unanimous, with Thomas writing a concurring opinion.
Don't forget, Trump would have to be in the conspiracy too. Somehow he is being snowballed and word is not getting back to him through the solicitor general that she's dead and she really didn't read the opinion...that she's really not there...as I was told JUST LAST WEEK "WE ARE BEING PLAYED!!!"...or he's in on it.
Either way, the man who isn't afraid to use his Twitter to tell the truth and apparently knows all...doesn't know that a SCOTUS justice is dead or incapacitated and ALL these people are lying and he is being duped.
That's what people want us to REALLY believe: That our president is an idiot...or a traitor.
A recent article:
SC cops defend keeping cash they seize: ‘What’s the incentive’ otherwise?
“If police don’t get to keep the money from forfeiture, “what is the incentive to go out and make a special effort?” Bruder said. “What is the incentive for interdiction?” “
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.