No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.That’s the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Everybody knows the portion of it that forbids “self-incrimination” (actually, the language is broader than that “nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”) But there’s also this part:
nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of lawIn order by law to justly take someone’s life, deprive them of their liberty, or take their property, it must be with due process of law.
So why the bloody hell does “Civil Asset Forfeiture” even exist? This amounts to taking someone’s property simply because some individual in some position in government–whether a law enforcement officer or some bureaucrat–simply claims that they think the property might be used for, or come as a result of, criminal action.
(Link to more - via Instapundit)