Philadelphia To Dismantle Asset Forfeiture Program, Pay Damages To Victims

[angelatc]

If you donated to the Institute for Justice, you're seeing some returns today:

https://reason.com/blog/2018/09/18/p...e-its-asset-fo

Four years after Philadelphia police seized the home of Markela and Chris Sourovelis for a minor drug crime committed by their son, the city has agreed to almost completely dismantle its controversial civil asset forfeiture program and pay $3 million to its victims.

The Institute for Justice filed the suit in 2014 on behalf of the Sourovelises, a couple whose house was seized without warning after their son was caught selling $40 worth of drugs outside. The same day the Sourovelises dropped their son off for court-ordered rehab treatment, they returned to find police had locked them out of their own home, even though there was no evidence they were aware of the drug activity.

The lawsuit alleged that the city was seizing 300 to 500 homes a year, violating residents' constitutional rights and creating an illegal profit incentive, since forfeiture revenue directly funds police and district attorney budgets.


Under civil asset forfeiture laws, police can seize property—cash, cars, and even houses—suspected of being connected to criminal activity, even if the owner is not charged with a crime.

More at link: https://reason.com/blog/2018/09/18/p...e-its-asset-fo

[Ender]

GOOD!

[timosman]

2014? Justice is slow.

[jkr]

[shakey1]

A spot of good news.

[phill4paul]

IfJ is one of the best orgs out there.

[timosman]

What happened to people who created this "law"? Shouldn't they be banned for life from holding a public office?

[jkr]

isn't it a JOE BIDDEN "joint"?

[Swordsmyth]

[Anti Federalist]

Supporter and donator since Kelo v. New London.

Bravo on the win!

[Bern]

[Grandmastersexsay]

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

I wonder what the founders would think today if they saw how the supreme court thinks civil forfeiture is ok because the courts are punishing the property, not the person?

[Swordsmyth]

I wonder what the founders would think today if they saw how the supreme court thinks civil forfeiture is ok because the courts are punishing the property, not the person?

They would declare that to be insane.................and they would be right.