• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court curbs power of government to impose heavy fines and seize property

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,065
Reaction score
33,398
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Supreme Court curbs power of government to impose heavy fines and seize property | Fox News

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled to drastically curb the powers that states and cities have to levy fines and seize property, marking the first time the court has applied the Constitution’s ban on excessive fines at the state level.




Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who returned to the court for the first time in almost two months after undergoing surgery for lung cancer, wrote the majority opinion in the case involving an Indiana man who had his Land Rover seized after he was arrested for selling $385 of heroin.

“Protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history for good reason: Such fines undermine other liberties," Ginsburg wrote. “They can be used, e.g., to retaliate against or chill the speech of political enemies. They can also be employed, not in service of penal purposes, but as a source of revenue.”
Finally, this theft is being addressed. Slip up, and the govt takes your stuff must stop. Amendment 14, Section 1 was used by both Ginsberg and Thomas, along with Amendment 8 regarding excessive fines.
 
Good. Civil forfeiture is massively abused.
 
This is very good news.
 
Excellent. I also love that the decision was unanimous.
 
I think it does not matter what political affiliation you are, we can all rejoice in this decision.
 
A non-Wisconsin parent with a daughter who was a college student in Wisconsin lost his vehicle because of three drug sales totaling $250 for which his daughter was never officially charged.

That's when I became aware of this situation. The kind of thing which makes you sick to your stomach that this could happen in America.
 
Good news. Perhaps there is still hope for the justice system after all.
 
Finally, this theft is being addressed. Slip up, and the govt takes your stuff must stop. Amendment 14, Section 1 was used by both Ginsberg and Thomas, along with Amendment 8 regarding excessive fines.

I just love how we can all unanimously agree that the police are abusing their power when it comes to taking people's money and property, even though only half the country seems to accept that the police are abusing their power when it comes to killing black people. I just don't understand how the right can bitch about the abuses of government, the size of government, civil forfeiture, and say they need guns in case they have to defend themselves from a tyrannical government, but then every single solitary time an agent of the government murders a black guy it's the right who immediately comes to the defense of the police.

If you want to say you live in a free country conceived in liberty then you have to be as concerned about the abuses of government that will not apply to you as you do about the ones that might.
 
This is all good news, long time coming.
 
I just love how we can all unanimously agree that the police are abusing their power when it comes to taking people's money and property, even though only half the country seems to accept that the police are abusing their power when it comes to killing black people. I just don't understand how the right can bitch about the abuses of government, the size of government, civil forfeiture, and say they need guns in case they have to defend themselves from a tyrannical government, but then every single solitary time an agent of the government murders a black guy it's the right who immediately comes to the defense of the police.

If you want to say you live in a free country conceived in liberty then you have to be as concerned about the abuses of government that will not apply to you as you do about the ones that might.

Not really comparing apples to apples here,

With forfeiture, there are DEFINITELY two sides, truth falls somewhere in the middle etc,

With the killings, chances are you are only getting one side of the story, and even then, it's aftermath of it, and it's he-said she said as to the origins of it.

So while everyone can agree that civil forfeiture needed to be reigned in, and everyone agrees that in general, police shouldn't be killing anyone, when it does happen, circumstances play a LOT in determining if it was a good shoot or not......
 
Not really comparing apples to apples here,
Sure, but that's because murdering someone deserves significantly MORE scrutiny and is a much worse abuse of power.

With forfeiture, there are DEFINITELY two sides, the truth falls somewhere in the middle etc,

With the killings, chances are you are only getting one side of the story, and even then, it's the aftermath of it, and it's he-said-she-said as to the origins of it.
Umm...No, that's what makes it much much worse. You see if the police take your property you are at least still alive so you can tell your side of the story. But when the police kill you that leaves you dead with no ability to tell anybody your view of what happened. The means it's even MORE important for us to stop giving the police the benefit of the doubt, and ensure that a meticulous investigation into the shooting is carried out by non-biased investigators.

So while everyone can agree that civil forfeiture needed to be reigned in, and everyone agrees that in general, police shouldn't be killing anyone, when it does happen, circumstances play a LOT in determining if it was a good shot or not......
What? That's true of all Murders, and all police interaction. Circumstances definately dictate whether or not the police should be able to seize your property as evidence. There are valid reasons for that to happen too.

The Bottom line is that Police got away with Civil Forfeiture for the same reason they get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to killing black people. Stupid people just assume that if you have an interaction with the police it was because you were doing something you shouldn't have been. In this particular case, the police seized a man's land rover because they found about $400 in heroin on him. Now if you asked the average idiot out there who thinks the war on drugs is a good idea, and that Heroine is bad they would probably think it was good that this ****ty drug dealer lost his Land Rover given that the car was probably paid for with Drug money.

The only thing that makes this case different in the minds of Conservatives is that white people tend to have a lot of money and property that they're afraid the police may seize whereas they're not the least bit concerned about the government blowing their brains out. They value their property more than they value the lives of minorities.
 
I just love how we can all unanimously agree that the police are abusing their power when it comes to taking people's money and property, even though only half the country seems to accept that the police are abusing their power when it comes to killing black people. I just don't understand how the right can bitch about the abuses of government, the size of government, civil forfeiture, and say they need guns in case they have to defend themselves from a tyrannical government, but then every single solitary time an agent of the government murders a black guy it's the right who immediately comes to the defense of the police.

If you want to say you live in a free country conceived in liberty then you have to be as concerned about the abuses of government that will not apply to you as you do about the ones that might.

Not the placed to debate this.
 
The injustice of Civil forfeiture was so outrageous that united a veryyyy partisan Supreme Court in a 9 to 0 decision!
 
And came in as a unanimous decision. This should be something that everyone of all political persuasion should be able to be united in celebrating.

WE should create more opportunities to realize that we share many common values:

I was thinking that perhaps Trump can declare a new national emergency and start incarcerating without trial regular, progressive and peaceful families together with their babies. This would give us an opportunity to sue him and have a Supreme Court rule unanimously against government's abuse...
Wait! Now, that I am thinking about it, If such thing happens both our society and the Supreme Court will split along partisan lines.

Never mind!
 
Great and better yet because of the unanimous decision. Just love those.
 
I just love how we can all unanimously agree that the police are abusing their power when it comes to taking people's money and property, even though only half the country seems to accept that the police are abusing their power when it comes to killing black people. I just don't understand how the right can bitch about the abuses of government, the size of government, civil forfeiture, and say they need guns in case they have to defend themselves from a tyrannical government, but then every single solitary time an agent of the government murders a black guy it's the right who immediately comes to the defense of the police.

Come on. Trump's campaign strategy has made it crystal clear why he thinks it's happening.


Trump’s Midterm Closing Argument: Pure Racial Fear

Trump and G.O.P. Candidates Escalate Race and Fear as Election Ploys

The question is, does Trump know his base?
 
I just love how we can all unanimously agree that the police are abusing their power when it comes to taking people's money and property, even though only half the country seems to accept that the police are abusing their power when it comes to killing black people. I just don't understand how the right can bitch about the abuses of government, the size of government, civil forfeiture, and say they need guns in case they have to defend themselves from a tyrannical government, but then every single solitary time an agent of the government murders a black guy it's the right who immediately comes to the defense of the police.

If you want to say you live in a free country conceived in liberty then you have to be as concerned about the abuses of government that will not apply to you as you do about the ones that might.

I’m with you. Are we a democracy or a dictatorship by the majority? We have very deep rooted oppressive ideations in our population—what to do?
 
Not the placed to debate this.

Yes, it is. The ruling here was a unanimous decision. There is nothing here to debate about the actual ruling except to point out the glaring hypocrisy in how easily conservatives can cheer the end of glaring abuse by the police in this thread while acting like police abuse is impossible in another. If you're capable of admitting that police across this country have been getting away with theft for far too long why is it so hard for you to grasp the possibility that a lot of them might be getting away with murder too?
 
Yes, it is. The ruling here was a unanimous decision. There is nothing here to debate about the actual ruling except to point out the glaring hypocrisy in how easily conservatives can cheer the end of glaring abuse by the police in this thread while acting like police abuse is impossible in another. If you're capable of admitting that police across this country have been getting away with theft for far too long why is it so hard for you to grasp the possibility that a lot of them might be getting away with murder too?

I don't have to admit to your bull****, buddy. And neither does anyone else around here. You are lying and mischaracterizing the entire BLM and police shooting thing. It's like you had your eyes closed the whole time, and didn't pay attention. BLM was formed on a LIE. "Hands up don't shoot" NEVER HAPPENED!!!!!!!!!!! Get that through your head. BLM looted and pillaged a town and others based on a lie. Cops have been prosecuted and convicted where it was proven, and gone to jail. And I supported that. So take your lies and run along.
 
I just love how we can all unanimously agree that the police are abusing their power when it comes to taking people's money and property, even though only half the country seems to accept that the police are abusing their power when it comes to killing black people. .


???? Revealing, the police kill more white people than black, but you only have a problem when it is a black person.
 
I just love how we can all unanimously agree that the police are abusing their power when it comes to taking people's money and property, even though only half the country seems to accept that the police are abusing their power when it comes to killing black people. I just don't understand how the right can bitch about the abuses of government, the size of government, civil forfeiture, and say they need guns in case they have to defend themselves from a tyrannical government, but then every single solitary time an agent of the government murders a black guy it's the right who immediately comes to the defense of the police.

If you want to say you live in a free country conceived in liberty then you have to be as concerned about the abuses of government that will not apply to you as you do about the ones that might.

Why try to hijack a perfectly good, non partisan, general agreement thread with your own personal diatribe about cops shooting offenders. Are you jealous that everyone seems to be in agreement here?
 
Back
Top Bottom