In its infancy, America’s founders set out to establish and secure the social liberties of its citizens. The rundown of “repeated injuries and usurpations,” by King George III, as outlined in the Declaration of Independence, was a reflection of the personalities of the individuals who drafted the Constitution. They needed an administration that by and large avoided our lives and went into them just in light of specific circumstances. However, Americans today are progressively deceived by quite possibly the most tricky infringement of social equality the country has ever seen.
It is referred to as civil forfeiture and it is the practice by which the government can hold onto your property and monetary resources—with only the justification of suspicion. Under civil forfeiture laws, the public authority can take your home, your business, your cash—basically any property—in light of the simple suspicion of bad behavior.
Part of the reason more Americans are not in shock over this practice is that they simply cannot believe it actually occurs; the writers of the Constitution intended to protect us from such maltreatment. All things considered, the Fourth Amendment is supposed to protect us against unreasonable search and seizure right? Isn’t the eighth Amendment expected to protect us from inordinate fines?
Stories of civil forfeiture are frequently met with suspicion and disbelief. Tragically, they are often true and further maltreatments continue to occur.
In Philadelphia, the public authority has raised civil forfeiture to an artistic expression. Specialists there seize somewhere in the range of three hundred and five hundred homes as well as different bits of land each year. Somewhere in the range of 2002 and 2012, the city gathered more than sixty-four million in civil forfeitures. Not to be outperformed, experts in New Mexico offer direct workshops on how governments can benefit from civil forfeiture.
Under American law, litigants are assumed innocent until proven guilty. Yet, in civil forfeiture, individuals are presumed guilty. The burden of proof rests with the person in question, who is forced to refute any wrongdoing, despite the fact that she has not been accused of anything.
Driving innocent citizens to basically refute a negative before their property is returned to them approaches absurdity. Most targets of civil forfeiture are almost always unable to recover the items taken from them; the burden of proof is excessively cumbersome, especially for individuals who do not have the financial ability to retaliate in light of the fact that the government has taken their resources.
Civil forfeiture is the stuff of third-world despots and it is not welcome in a free society. Up until now, the individuals focusing on this issue have been largely bipartisan. Subsequently, Congress needs to make a move by getting control over or nullifying civil forfeiture altogether.
If you have become the target of civil forfeiture, or have further questions regarding it, please contact Logan and Thompson at 423-476-2251 or find them online at loganthompsonlaw.com.
