Supreme Court Upholds Limited Due Process in Civil Forfeiture Cases

In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that civil asset forfeiture does not require a separate preliminary hearing, sparking debate over due process rights.

The Supreme Court ruled that timely forfeiture hearings suffice under the Constitution, rejecting the need for preliminary hearings to assess police seizures.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, cited historical practices and past precedents to support the decision.
Concurring opinions by Justices Gorsuch and Thomas hinted at openness to reconsider the broader constitutionality of civil forfeiture laws.
Critics argue the ruling disproportionately affects the poor and could lead to prolonged deprivation of property without timely legal recourse.
Civil rights advocates and some justices express concern over the potential for abuse under current civil forfeiture practices, indicating a future legal battleground.