[meyer]

You will find it, however, several replies into this thread when someone either made an unsubstantiated leap or decided to introduce spin.

That is exactly what I did. I stand corrected. That's what happens when one skims the article and reads the replies that stand out above the rest.

[dirtboy]

Please find where it says that there is any siezure law being proposed that doesn't require a guilty verdict.

Nitpick. From the end of the article:

Mr. Baker said he hopes the legislation will give the SEC seizure powers much like the Drug Enforcement Administration.

"If you happen to be selling drugs and you're in somebody else's car, that car gets impounded, put in a lot and protected until the issues have been resolved," Mr. Baker said. "So, we seize assets so that they don't run off to the Caribbean or off to trial lawyers, that they stay in a bank account so that they can be allocated to their rightful owner."

What Mr. Baker is promoting is seizure powers like the DEA. Where they can seize property at the time of arrest. So it is a very reasonable presumption that folks are making here, and you are trying to derail them by nitpicking.