DoJ curtails civil forfeiture

[Wells]

Only partial, since it'll take Congress to end it entirely, but Holder placed major restrictions on police exercise of civil forfeiture.

Police will no longer be able to seize private assets through the federal program unless they're directly linked to public safety concerns. Items that can still be seized include illegal firearms, ammunition, explosives, and property associated with child pornography.

http://www.vox.com/2015/1/16/7558329...set-forfeiture

And here's the original release

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorn...-and-local-law

[Nakura Chambers]

Edit: Nevermind, I thought this was meant as a response to another thread.

[Independent voter]

It makes sense. Like any program that can be abused eventually someone will abuse the program.

[Wells]

It makes sense. Like any program that can be abused eventually someone will abuse the program.

Even outside of abuse cases, its hard to argue this was even constitutional, barring instances of immediate danger.

[belfpala]

Finally. I got pulled over a couple weeks ago for having a headlight out (yes, my fault, it's now replaced), and the cop really did ask how much money I had on me. If I had answered truthfully, I guarantee my car and I would have been searched, because I had a few thousand dollars with me. Was on the way from my business to the bank.

[Dendrek]

Finally. I got pulled over a couple weeks ago for having a headlight out (yes, my fault, it's now replaced), and the cop really did ask how much money I had on me. If I had answered truthfully, I guarantee my car and I would have been searched, because I had a few thousand dollars with me. Was on the way from my business to the bank.

You lied to a cop?!! How were you not shot in the face? Let me guess, straight, Christian, white male [edit to add] and a business owner...? In that case, you could have easily waved a gun at him and gotten away with it. Grats on your privilege.

/JOKING don't infract me

[Themius]

This is awesome news. I remember doing a thread on this issue.

[Fexus]

It makes sense. Like any program that can be abused eventually someone will abuse the program.

To be honest it's pretty much abuse of authority ipso facto.

[Independent voter]

Even outside of abuse cases, its hard to argue this was even constitutional, barring instances of immediate danger.

They seize people's money all the time in the way of fines and have been for years.. That's what a traffic ticket essentially is, a seizure of property. Nobody complains about it because it isn't tangible, but you can buy stuff with it, making it tangible.

[belfpala]

You lied to a cop?!! How were you not shot in the face? Let me guess, straight, Christian, white male? In that case, you could have easily waved a gun at him and gotten away with it. Grats on your privilege.

/JOKING don't infract me

Straight white male, not so much Christian. But you're not incorrect. If I had been driving as a male from any other demographic, I would have been asked to step out of the car. Pretty sure, at least. Guilty of "driving while black" one of my black friends calls it.

[Masark]

They seize people's money all the time in the way of fines and have been for years.. That's what a traffic ticket essentially is, a seizure of property. Nobody complains about it because it isn't tangible, but you can buy stuff with it, making it tangible.

I dunno how it is in Nevada, but most places don't allow cop to set the fine for a traffic offence at "all the cash you have in your wallet".

[belfpala]

I dunno how it is in Nevada, but most places don't allow cop to set the fine for a traffic offence at "all the cash you have in your wallet".

That's not what civil forfeiture is. The short version: they can seize any property being used in a crime. It's gotten completely out of hand, to the point of seizing a house because the underage son was selling drugs there.

[Fexus]

They seize people's money all the time in the way of fines and have been for years.. That's what a traffic ticket essentially is, a seizure of property. Nobody complains about it because it isn't tangible, but you can buy stuff with it, making it tangible.

We have civil laws that when you break you pay a fine. That is completely different than cops having carte blanche to take your stuff for any reason whatsoever.

- - - Updated - - -

That's not what civil forfeiture is. The short version: they can seize any property being used in a crime. It's gotten completely out of hand, to the point of seizing a house because the underage son was selling drugs there.

They can seize property suspected to be used in a crime, and it's up to you to prove that it's not.

[Deleted]

About damn time.

[belfpala]

They can seize property suspected to be used in a crime, and it's up to you to prove that it's not.

And that's the problem.

[Fexus]

I'm sorry, Jon Stewart, but your protégé is now the source of all of my views from here on out.

I can't believe anything like this was ever allowed.

That show is golden. Every time I'm having a political discussion with someone I catch myself saying, "John Oliver does a great informative and entertaining segment on that issue."

[Wells]

They seize people's money all the time in the way of fines and have been for years.. That's what a traffic ticket essentially is, a seizure of property. Nobody complains about it because it isn't tangible, but you can buy stuff with it, making it tangible.

Traffic tickets aren't civil forfeiture.

[Masark]

That's not what civil forfeiture is. The short version: they can seize any property being used in a crime. It's gotten completely out of hand, to the point of seizing a house because the underage son was selling drugs there.

Incorrect. There is no requirement that the property be proven to related to a crime.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/inv...top-and-seize/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...ffd_story.html

[Wells]

But seriously, how is this not considered a blatant violation of the fourth amendment?

A combination of courts being really cop friendly and that most of the people hit with it are of limited means to take on a police department in the first place.

Plus it did a ton of good in dealing with drug trafficking and organized crime in the 70s and early 80s which makes courts reluctant to crack down on it.

[NoiseTank13]

Good start.

Finish the job Congress- ahahaha I couldn't say that with a straight face.