this post was submitted on 10 May 2024

1 points (100.0% liked)

News

23296 readers

3257 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Supreme Court Rules Against Women Whose Cars Were Seized by the Police (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Archived at https://ghostarchive.org/archive/CNrKS

top 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

“Culley and Sutton’s argument for a separate preliminary hearing appears in many respects to be a backdoor argument for a more timely hearing so that a property owner with a good defense against forfeiture can recover her property more quickly,” he wrote. “But the court’s precedents already require a timely hearing.”
Alabama has since amended its forfeiture law to allow owners of seized property to request expedited hearings.
“Our decision today does not preclude those legislatively prescribed innovations,” Justice Kavanaugh wrote. “Rather, our decision simply addresses the base-line protection of the due process clause.”

Seems like it's less about civil forfeiture and more about how quickly can they get their property back when civil forfeiture happens

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think you have confused civil forfeiture with impounding.

You don't get your stuff back from civil forfeiture.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think you haven't read the article

Both women literally already got their cars back

They're suing because the process was, as another commenter said, a huge pain in the ass

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Impounding = you just have to pay to get car back.

Civil forfeiture = you have lost your vehicle, but there is a process to overturn the seizure.

The fact that there is a way to reverse a decision does not mean the default difference is that the former expects you to get it back and the latter is set up that you don't get it back (unless you do a bunch of extra steps).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You do realize the original comment was simply describing the reason for the lawsuit and you commented “I think you are confused.”

From the article “Ms. Culley and Ms. Sutton filed class actions in federal court saying that they should have been afforded prompt interim hearings to argue…”

They are literally saying they wanted to be able to streamline this process and get their stuff back faster. Explaining the difference between impounding and civil forfeiture doesn’t change the content of the article. The original comment was accurate in describing what the article was about.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

No, the fact that it is civil forfeiture, which is handled differently than impounding, is relevant for a post that says:

how quickly can they get their property back when civil forfeiture happens

That wording implies that they will get their property back, when the default for civil forfeiture is not getting their property back. Expediting the hearings doesn't change the underlying issue of civil forfeiture being the police taking away people's stuff for a reason that has nothing to do with their arrests and forcing people to justify getting it back.

It will also speed up the cases where they are not given their stuff back.