Defending civil asset forfeiture means defending the government's power to seize your car if you were going 5 miles-per-hour over the speed limit. Thankfully, it seems like none of the nine justices were willing to buy Indiana's argument (and more than a few were willing to openly laugh it, based on the transcript). But the exchange between Breyer and Fisher shows just how absurd the government's asset forfeiture powers are—and why the outcome of the Timbs case could be so significant. via reason.com
Read more detail on Recent Legal Theory posts –