←back to thread

Alaska Seized a $95,000 Plane over Illicit Cargo: A Six-Pack of Beer

(www.nytimes.com)
67 points ceejayoz | 2 comments | 29 Sep 25 15:34 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
SilverElfin ◴[29 Sep 25 15:41 UTC] No.45415187[source]▶
Civil forfeiture is something both sides agree is unconstitutional and wrong. Why has it taken so long to ban it and hold people accountable?
replies(8): >>45415239 #>>45415479 #>>45415489 #>>45415512 #>>45416144 #>>45416434 #>>45420020 #>>45422532 #
brigade ◴[29 Sep 25 23:14 UTC] No.45420020[source]▶
This is not civil forfeiture in which property is seized without any person being convicted (or often even charged) with a crime.

This is specifically a punishment (effective fine) tied to having been convicted of certain crimes in Alaska.

replies(1): >>45420176 #
1. NetMageSCW ◴[29 Sep 25 23:32 UTC] No.45420176[source]▶
Unreasonable search and seizure is prohibited by the fourth amendment and this is definitely unreasonable.

This would also seem to violate the eighth amendment as both cruel and unusual and in effect an excessive fine.

replies(1): >>45420296 #
2. brigade ◴[29 Sep 25 23:51 UTC] No.45420296[source]▶
“Unreasonable” in the context of the 4th amendment means whether they have sufficient reason to execute the search and seizure, which they did here. Evidence of smuggling was in plain sight.

He is appealing to the supreme court on 8th amendment grounds of excessive fines, but the Supreme Court has thus far left it to individual states to determine whether individual fines are excessive. To which Alaska’s Supreme Court has already said “nope” in this case.

At any rate, this case is rather unrelated to why civil forfeiture should be abolished.