Civil Forfeiture: Unconstitutional and Unfair Edward Maggio, Esq.

Did you know that Salem, West Virginia (not the Salem that burned all of those witches in the late 17th century, just another city that bears its name) still has a law on the books that makes it illegal to eat a piece of candy less than ninety minutes before church service begins on a Sunday?

Edward Maggio, Esq. says that most of the ridiculous laws that federal, state, and local governments have on their books exist simply to be made fun of by online list articles, are never enforced, and only persist because no one has bothered to go back through the books and remove that law that prohibits bartenders in North Dakota from serving pretzels and beer at the same time.

One of the most ridiculous laws, however, is still actively enforced. It’s called civil forfeiture, and in short, it means that if the police suspect you of committing a crime, that can seize your possessions and sell them for their own profit. Yes, you read that correctly. You don’t have to be charged or convicted of a crime (that’s called criminal forfeiture and still sounds pretty unfair). You just have to be suspected of a crime. A police department could list you as a suspect of a crime, come and collect your car, your laptop, all your clothes, the deed to your house, etc. and sell any and all to fund that department’s own budget.

That is a scenario that could happen—and as unbelievable as it sounds, it does happen. Before we get to the opinion, let’s look at the facts by Edward Maggio, Esq. . The Fourth Amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” Some proponents have gone on to cite the last half of the amendment, which discusses warrants issued on probable cause: “…and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”