4 ms·

How has civil forfeiture not been ruled illegal at this point? It’s one of the most disgusting corrupt things I’ve seen in my lifetime any I can’t believe both

How has civil forfeiture not been ruled illegal at this point? It’s one of the most disgusting corrupt things I’ve seen in my lifetime any I can’t believe both parties support this.

nadermx 2y ago
If you ever watch the series "The wire" you might have a sense as to why
- aziaziazi 2y ago
  I read that as "those who watch it already know". Could you or someone else share what’s shown in that series? I’m not willing to devote dizains hours to have that answer.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    The Wire is about the War on Drugs. The War on Drugs is responsible for probably 75% of the shockingly oppressive laws still on the books, with most of the balance being the War on Terror.
  - defrost 2y ago
    There's a scene in which an aide for a city politician is stopped leaving known drug dealing actors and the car is found to have bag stuffed with a large amount of cash which is seized. The point moving forward is will anybody claim the cash and offer an explanation as to where it came from. The above "you'll know why" appears to carry an implicit "because all cash with no receipt is criminal proceeds". The problem with that is stories abound of Police seizing cash and other assets and keeping them, spending money, auctioning goods, etc that were never criminal proceeds .. or rather never proved to be criminal proceeds.
    - Sohcahtoa82 2y ago
      Okay, but there's a world of difference between a large amount of cash that nobody wants to claim because police know it's drug money versus an innocent person that the police have stolen money from without any true suspicion and the person has been fighting in the courts for years to get their money back.
      - defrost 2y ago
        I fully agree, but I'm merely the person that expanded on the lazy The Wire comment above. @blindriver was correct (IMHO) to rail against civil forfeiture and @nadermx responded with a low effort opaque un-HN worthy quip.
- moomin 2y ago
  The Wire is a great show, but it’s still copaganda. Dude managed to create a five year show set in the Baltimore Police Department without mentioning racism once.
  - potato3732842 2y ago
    Reminds me of the time Frontline(?) had some cameras following around the Newark drug task force (post scandal so they knew to be on their best behavior) and they couldn't hold it together long enough to make enough footage hour or so episode. They initiated a baseless stop and frisk on camera and then dogpiled the guy when he said to leave him alone.
sneak 2y ago
Everyone viewed as legitimate in the eyes of the state has stopped using cash, so leaving this in place as an additional risk to carrying or using cash is a nice bonus in the war against financial privacy and freedom. One more nail in the coffin of being able to transact in ways either unknown to or unapproved by the state. In 2011 I spoke at the CCC about why it’s essential to have free and censorship-resistant payments that the state cannot veto: https://media.ccc.de/v/cccamp11-4591-financing_the_revolution-en https://media.ccc.de/v/cccamp11-4591-financing_the_revolutio... Always use and carry cash. Always tip in cash. Don’t do business with places that don’t accept cash. Store some cash in your home and your car (hidden) for emergencies.
tdb7893 2y ago
I can believe it. Both parties are pretty "law and order" and rely on relationships with the police. Why piss off an important group of people for an issue that isn't going to sway any votes. Reform here is something which would presumably have a large amount of support but that's enough to get a law passed or the US would look very different, there are tons of popular things that will never be laws.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> How has civil forfeiture not been ruled illegal at this point? Isn’t part of the problem prosecutors dropping cases before they make it through appeals? I’m almost ready to PAC an elected prosecutor who commits to taking a test case to SCOTUS.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  > Isn’t part of the problem prosecutors dropping cases before they make it through appeals? Not really, cases on civil forfeiture do make it to the US Supreme Court, the most recent case being decided in 2024.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    Cases the prosecutors think they can win make it. But OPs statement is valid, prosecutors can just drop any case they fear will set a precedent and under our system that is the end of the discussion. OPs point is it gives prosecutors an additional thumb on the scale when it come to court oversight.
db48x 2y ago
It has its roots in something very necessary: disposal of abandoned property, especially illegal goods for which no owner can be identified. Of course it has gotten slightly out of hand.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  But most abandoned property doesn't go through that process, does it?
  - db48x 2y ago
    Garbage found at the side of the street, no. A bag of heroin found in an abandoned building, certainly.
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      My point is, it really takes the "need" out of the situation. We have perfectly good ways to handle lost items without forfeiture. Using those systems, the confiscation problem disappears. And if anyone claims a bag of heroin the same way they would claim a lost phone... let them. Then arrest them after they do that.
      - db48x 2y ago
        As amusing as that would be, forfeiture is how you get judicial oversight of the process. If someone wants to claim their misplaced drugs then they have to show up at the trial and defend their right to posses them. Consider a more nuanced, and more common, case: a shipment of batteries labeled as Apple™ products arrives in port. The shipping address indicates that they aren’t going to Apple, but to one Louis Rossmann. Clearly these must be counterfeits, right? Nobody else could possibly be allowed to own items with “Apple™” printed on them, after all. Customs seizes the shipment with the intent to destroy them. If Louis wants them he can go to court to prove that he has a right to own batteries with the word “Apple™” on them. Clearly we want Louis to be able to clear up the misunderstanding and recover his property (genuine batteries salvaged from damaged phones), and clearly customs doesn’t want to risk storing them forever. Both parties want a definitive end state; they don’t want the disagreement to drag on forever. And certainly Louis wants the oversight of a judge who can ensure that procedure is followed correctly, and that it is the same procedure that was documented ahead of time. It might be an annoying procedure, but at least it is one that he can learn about in advance.
AngryData 2y ago
Corruption is a large part of what funds our criminal justice system, and politicians will never do anything to make them appear like they are against law enforcement or "soft on crime".
potato3732842 2y ago
Same reason it took half a century for every other rights violation to get in front of a court that matters. The agencies and governments violating people's rights play all sorts of games to prevent it so that they can keep the gravy train rolling.
StefanBatory 2y ago
First party who would propose it would lose support for cops/justice system workers.

How has civil forfeiture not been ruled illegal at this point? It’s one of the most disgusting corrupt things I’ve seen in my lifetime any I can’t believe both parties support this.

nadermx 2y ago

If you ever watch the series "The wire" you might have a sense as to why

aziaziazi 2y ago
I read that as "those who watch it already know". Could you or someone else share what’s shown in that series? I’m not willing to devote dizains hours to have that answer.
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  The Wire is about the War on Drugs. The War on Drugs is responsible for probably 75% of the shockingly oppressive laws still on the books, with most of the balance being the War on Terror.
- defrost 2y ago
  There's a scene in which an aide for a city politician is stopped leaving known drug dealing actors and the car is found to have bag stuffed with a large amount of cash which is seized. The point moving forward is will anybody claim the cash and offer an explanation as to where it came from. The above "you'll know why" appears to carry an implicit "because all cash with no receipt is criminal proceeds". The problem with that is stories abound of Police seizing cash and other assets and keeping them, spending money, auctioning goods, etc that were never criminal proceeds .. or rather never proved to be criminal proceeds.
  - Sohcahtoa82 2y ago
    Okay, but there's a world of difference between a large amount of cash that nobody wants to claim because police know it's drug money versus an innocent person that the police have stolen money from without any true suspicion and the person has been fighting in the courts for years to get their money back.
    - defrost 2y ago
      I fully agree, but I'm merely the person that expanded on the lazy The Wire comment above. @blindriver was correct (IMHO) to rail against civil forfeiture and @nadermx responded with a low effort opaque un-HN worthy quip.
moomin 2y ago
The Wire is a great show, but it’s still copaganda. Dude managed to create a five year show set in the Baltimore Police Department without mentioning racism once.
- potato3732842 2y ago
  Reminds me of the time Frontline(?) had some cameras following around the Newark drug task force (post scandal so they knew to be on their best behavior) and they couldn't hold it together long enough to make enough footage hour or so episode. They initiated a baseless stop and frisk on camera and then dogpiled the guy when he said to leave him alone.

sneak 2y ago

Everyone viewed as legitimate in the eyes of the state has stopped using cash, so leaving this in place as an additional risk to carrying or using cash is a nice bonus in the war against financial privacy and freedom. One more nail in the coffin of being able to transact in ways either unknown to or unapproved by the state. In 2011 I spoke at the CCC about why it’s essential to have free and censorship-resistant payments that the state cannot veto: https://media.ccc.de/v/cccamp11-4591-financing_the_revolution-en https://media.ccc.de/v/cccamp11-4591-financing_the_revolutio... Always use and carry cash. Always tip in cash. Don’t do business with places that don’t accept cash. Store some cash in your home and your car (hidden) for emergencies.

tdb7893 2y ago

I can believe it. Both parties are pretty "law and order" and rely on relationships with the police. Why piss off an important group of people for an issue that isn't going to sway any votes. Reform here is something which would presumably have a large amount of support but that's enough to get a law passed or the US would look very different, there are tons of popular things that will never be laws.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> How has civil forfeiture not been ruled illegal at this point? Isn’t part of the problem prosecutors dropping cases before they make it through appeals? I’m almost ready to PAC an elected prosecutor who commits to taking a test case to SCOTUS.

dragonwriter 2y ago
> Isn’t part of the problem prosecutors dropping cases before they make it through appeals? Not really, cases on civil forfeiture do make it to the US Supreme Court, the most recent case being decided in 2024.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago
  Cases the prosecutors think they can win make it. But OPs statement is valid, prosecutors can just drop any case they fear will set a precedent and under our system that is the end of the discussion. OPs point is it gives prosecutors an additional thumb on the scale when it come to court oversight.

db48x 2y ago

It has its roots in something very necessary: disposal of abandoned property, especially illegal goods for which no owner can be identified. Of course it has gotten slightly out of hand.

Dylan16807 2y ago
But most abandoned property doesn't go through that process, does it?
- db48x 2y ago
  Garbage found at the side of the street, no. A bag of heroin found in an abandoned building, certainly.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    My point is, it really takes the "need" out of the situation. We have perfectly good ways to handle lost items without forfeiture. Using those systems, the confiscation problem disappears. And if anyone claims a bag of heroin the same way they would claim a lost phone... let them. Then arrest them after they do that.
    - db48x 2y ago
      As amusing as that would be, forfeiture is how you get judicial oversight of the process. If someone wants to claim their misplaced drugs then they have to show up at the trial and defend their right to posses them. Consider a more nuanced, and more common, case: a shipment of batteries labeled as Apple™ products arrives in port. The shipping address indicates that they aren’t going to Apple, but to one Louis Rossmann. Clearly these must be counterfeits, right? Nobody else could possibly be allowed to own items with “Apple™” printed on them, after all. Customs seizes the shipment with the intent to destroy them. If Louis wants them he can go to court to prove that he has a right to own batteries with the word “Apple™” on them. Clearly we want Louis to be able to clear up the misunderstanding and recover his property (genuine batteries salvaged from damaged phones), and clearly customs doesn’t want to risk storing them forever. Both parties want a definitive end state; they don’t want the disagreement to drag on forever. And certainly Louis wants the oversight of a judge who can ensure that procedure is followed correctly, and that it is the same procedure that was documented ahead of time. It might be an annoying procedure, but at least it is one that he can learn about in advance.

AngryData 2y ago

Corruption is a large part of what funds our criminal justice system, and politicians will never do anything to make them appear like they are against law enforcement or "soft on crime".

potato3732842 2y ago

Same reason it took half a century for every other rights violation to get in front of a court that matters. The agencies and governments violating people's rights play all sorts of games to prevent it so that they can keep the gravy train rolling.

StefanBatory 2y ago

First party who would propose it would lose support for cops/justice system workers.