How Much Further Will We Let This Go?

[Zelig]

The issue might (?) be that their primary target is those who cannot legally defend themselves.

Well yeah, I mean, can you imagine the police trying to seize Rockefeller Center?

 

[warpus]

Does anyone know if they are able to take money and stuff away from non-Americans? Say I'm driving through Texas with $5,000 in cash in my bag, does this "guilty until proven innocent and even after" stuff apply only to Americans or tourists too?

Depends on the state, I'm guessing?

I never drive around Texas with $5,000 in a bag with me, but it's good to know these things just in case.

 

[jackelgull]

Well yeah, I mean, can you imagine the police trying to seize Rockefeller Center?

http://articles.latimes.com/1992-10-11/local/me-257_1_don-scott

Even the rich aren't spared.

 

[El_Machinae]

It needs to be all pre-arranged, like they did with Rosa Parks.

 

[Zelig]

Does anyone know if they are able to take money and stuff away from non-Americans? Say I'm driving through Texas with $5,000 in cash in my bag, does this "guilty until proven innocent and even after" stuff apply only to Americans or tourists too?

Depends on the state, I'm guessing?

I never drive around Texas with $5,000 in a bag with me, but it's good to know these things just in case.

They'll probably just take it from you at the border. Good rule of thumb is to not enter the US with anything that you don't mind losing. When I travel to the US, I only bring disposable electronics containing only encrypted data.

 

[classical_hero]

technically it isn't, since the amendments only concern rights of people, not rights of property, but that is only because no one could have predicted that someone could have come up with such an asinine procedure to seize property.

The part that is relevant is that no persons shall be deprived of property without due process or fair compensation. This satisfies none of them.

 

[JollyRoger]

The IRS isn't the police.

They are policing the tax code and many of its agents are considered law enforcement.

 

[Kaitzilla]

3 months later and some good news!
The Feds are canceling most of their civil asset forfeiture program.



For the 1st time ever, Eric Holder actually did something right.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/01/16/us/politics/ap-us-asset-forfeiture-program.html?_r=1

WASHINGTON — Attorney General Eric Holder on Friday announced sweeping changes to a federal civil asset forfeiture program that local law enforcement agencies have been able to use to seize property.

The asset forfeiture practice has been criticized, including by civil liberties groups and members of Congress, because it enables law enforcement to seize possessions — such as cars and money — without an indictment or evidence that a crime has occurred.

Under new rules announced Friday, federal agencies will no longer be able to accept or "adopt" assets seized by local and state law enforcement agencies — unless the property includes firearms, ammunitions, explosives, child pornography or other materials concerning public safety. Holder described the new policy as the "first step in a comprehensive review."

The new policy does not affect asset seizures made under joint state and federal operations, and local law enforcement may still seize property under state laws.

The program was developed at a time when most states didn't have their own asset forfeiture laws and did not have legal authority to forfeit seized items, raising concerns that seized property might ultimately return to the hands of criminals. But Holder said all states now have civil or criminal asset forfeiture law, so it's no longer as necessary for local law enforcement to turn over seized property to federal agencies.

Legislation in Congress is planned to make additional changes in the area of civil asset forfeiture.

Civil liberties groups praised the attorney general's move.

A good 1st step!
Now the State and Local cops need to do the same.

 

[JollyRoger]

unless the property includes firearms, ammunitions, explosives, child pornography

Apparently the administration is still singling out Tea Partiers.

 

[Harv]

Where is the outrage over this? This kind of government thuggery is what people should be protesting in the streets over and I feel they would be if this were taking place in any other nation but the US. The American people, however, seem perfectly content with just letting the government take more and more with little to no resistance. This law the IRS is using seems highly unconstitutional in the first place since it requires one to prove their innocence to have their own property returned to them. Not to mention this seems a lot like illegal search and seizure to me.

I am with CH on this one. Fifth Amendment:

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 times of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense 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.

Here is my first question: Say a case like this goes all the way to the US Supreme Court, and they find something to make it stand, then what?

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, that entirely depends on what process the law decides is due. I'm not super hopeful the courts will get off their butts to do anything about this unless the keening gets much loader than it is now.

 

[luiz]

http://articles.latimes.com/1992-10-11/local/me-257_1_don-scott

Even the rich aren't spared.

Armed with a search warrant containing information that Scott was believed to be illegally cultivating marijuana plants, the deputies restrained his wife and burst into the rustic wood and stone ranch house's living room.

There stood the wiry Scott, barefoot, clad in a T-shirt and jeans, a .38-caliber revolver held in his right hand over his head as deputies ordered him to drop it.

As Scott brought his arm down, two deputies opened fire at close range. One of the .9-millimeter bullets missed, crashing through the living room wall. But two found their mark, hitting Scott in the upper chest and killing him instantly.

Deputies searched Scott's property for hours after the fatal shooting, but not a single marijuana plant was found.

I don't see how that's not murder...

 

[Farm Boy]

Murder is punishable by the state, so it's something different definitionally.

 

[timtofly]

Homicide by reason of insanity.

 

[hangman]

I don't see how that's not murder...

Oh, this stuff happens all the time. I'm sure he "reached for his wasteband" and the cops "feared for their lives." Welcome to Amurica!

 

[tetley]

The policing of civil forfeiture is designed to discourage you from using cash. If you deal in checks, credit cards, wire transfers, etc., there is a record of your transactions and they can track it. They don't want you dealing in cash because they can't track it.

Big brother, pure and simple.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Come on, Big Brother! Couldn't you just ask for the grocery store receipt? It's not like there's many store chains in which you can walk into and say "Hi, I'd like two pounds of nicely refined cocaine", and even if there were, they'd be already watching over 'em.

 

[Antilogic]

Glad to hear it won't be going much further.

Although now I'm pretty curious as to the balance of civil forfeiture through the federal level program against the state- to municipal/local- level programs. Is this window dressing, or will this significantly cut the rate of seizure?



And come on now, Kaitzilla, surely Eric Holder has done at least two things right.

 

[Rashiminos]

Does anyone know if they are able to take money and stuff away from non-Americans? Say I'm driving through Texas with $5,000 in cash in my bag, does this "guilty until proven innocent and even after" stuff apply only to Americans or tourists too?

Depends on the state, I'm guessing?

I never drive around Texas with $5,000 in a bag with me, but it's good to know these things just in case.

Aside from cases of diplomatic immunity, I imagine that would be so.

Here is my first question: Say a case like this goes all the way to the US Supreme Court, and they find something to make it stand, then what?

Partially in response to this but mostly in response to the title: Bottom-Up Intervention.

 

[illram]

Actually state level forfeiture is probably even more nefarious and widespread. There is a great New Yorker article on this from last year.