Supreme Court Rules The police can wrongly confiscate your car and keep it for weeks or months

Members of the U.S. Supreme Court just voted to strike down legislation that would have allowed those with car was mistakenly arrested because the government has the opportunity to immediately appeal the decision. Instead of, Innocent drivers will continue must wait for a “timely hearing,” which can take weeks or even months.

Two drivers whose vehicle was impounded while it was being used by someone else have filed a petition with the Supreme Court requesting that the trial process proceed. Return the vehicle to the owner to be promoted. The case calls for an immediate appeals process, which would make it easier for anyone whose vehicle was wrongly impounded to be returned to its rightful owner, report LA Times.

Instances where a rule like this could be used include those where a stolen car is used to commit a crime or if you lend your car to someone and they pay a hefty price. . Speeding ticket. However, the case was kicked to the curb after it was voted down by the justices six to three.

The LA Times reported that the lawsuit was not supported because the justices believed that many states already had their own processes on-site to return vehicles to their owners after being seized by authorities. As the website explains:

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, speaking on behalf of the court, said states have different rules on forfeiture and judges are cautious about requiring a second preliminary hearing in all confiscation cases.

He wrote in Culley v. Marshall: “When police seize and subsequently seek civil forfeiture of an automobile used in the commission of a drug crime, the Constitution requires a hearing on the forfeiture. timely collection”. “The question here is whether the Constitution requires a separate preliminary hearing to determine whether police can retain the vehicle pending the forfeiture hearing. This Court’s precedents determine that the answer is no.”

The case was brought before the court because two women both had their cars confiscated while being driven by someone else. Halima Culley lent her car to her college-aged son to drive, while Lena Sutton lent her car to a friend.

After her The car was confiscated by the authoritiesCulley had to wait a year before filing a complaint, reports time. One month after filing her complaint, her car was returned.

After fighting to get their confiscated cars back, two women have filed a class action lawsuit seeking damages after they were not given a route to quickly appeal the confiscation decisions. mine. In their case, Cullet and Sutton claimed that the U.S. Constitution “requires a prompt, post-confiscation opportunity for innocent auto owners,” the report said. LA Times.

While their case was rejected by the court judges, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch at least acknowledged that the court needs “better rules in this area” in the future.