Supreme Court Rules Against Women Whose Cars Were Seized by the Police

gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 206 points –
Supreme Court Rules Against Women Whose Cars Were Seized by the Police
nytimes.com
27

You are viewing a single comment

I'm not sure how much it should matter, but neither of the cars were in use by the owner, and both were confiscated with drivers who had drugs on them. I'm not saying right or wrong, but cops didn't just snag the cars and bounce. ACAB.

Saying the cars weren't in use by the owners is saying cops can confiscate parked cars. Adding a bit about drugs, which should be legal and regulated, is just saying cops can steal your stuff as long as they claim you did something wrong.

You are saying it was right by blaming the victims.

I'm not sure how much it should matter

I know exactly how much: not one whit. The cops stole legal property from people who themselves hadn't broken the law.

If someone committed perjury while astride my bicycle, I'd still ask for my bike back after cops finished questioning it.

Even if they had been the ones to break the law, the police should not be able to take anything, let alone without any due process, in the first place unless it's specifically to be temporarily held as evidence of a crime.

Sounds like personal use amounts though. One of Marijuana and the other meth. I can understand impounding the car and having to pay the also a crime tow amount. But to just take the car, when it's not being used to traffic drugs is complete BS.

I'm frankly surprised they didn't also arrest the owners anyway.

It's a lot more paperwork to charge someone with a crime.

1 more...