[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

House Republicans’ national security-threatening impeachment stunt, explained by an expert

Son Volt’s "Union" Joins in the Anti-Trump Clamor

Rep. Elise Stefanik Discusses Schemes, Ploys and Manipulative Games of Adam Schiff…

Sacré Bleu! Trump-Basher Pierre Delecto’s Approval Rating is Now Underwater in Utah

HERE WE GO: SchiffÂ’s Star Witness Who Met with Staffers Claims Trump Quid Pro Quo

Out-Of-Control Pelosi & Schiff Ban Republicans From Viewing Transcripts Of ‘Secret’ Impeachment Hearings Says Report

Texas: Jury Rules Against Dad Fighting 7-Year-Old Son’s Gender Transition

Male-to-female professor wins women’s cycling championship again, taunts female critics

Trans Activists Force Procter & Gamble To Remove Female Venus Symbol From Sanitary Pads Packaging

Senate Leader McConnell Rebuffs President Trump – Introduces Resolution To Keep US Troops In Syria

Mitch McConnell Says He Will Sit Down with Chuck Schumer to Discuss Impeachment Proceedings

Trump defends Gabbard in Clinton spat, says she's no agent

What if the Police Don’t Identify Themselves?

WATCH: SWAT Wakes Up Disoriented Homeless Man, Execute Him for Reaching for His Waistband

https://futurism.com/the-byte/us-army-tom-delonge-ufo-research

Officer Who Shot Atatiana Jefferson Wasn't Asked to Do Wellness Check Despite Neighbor's Request

Ready to Pay $30,000 for Sharing a Photo Online? The House of Representatives Thinks You Are

The Pathocracy of the Deep State: Tyranny at the Hands of a Psychopathic Government

Hillary telling friends: If I thought there was an opening in the primary, I’d consider jumping in

AGW Escalation

Stockholm Syndrome

The IRS Admits it is Targeting the Poor Because it is “Easier and Cheaper” Than Auditing the Wealthy

NBC News Thinks Getting Microchipped Sounds Super-Convenient

Seattle Public Schools Will Start Teaching That Math Is Oppressive

Is Sam Adams' New 28 Percent ABV Beer Legal in Your State?

San Francisco Mint striking Enhanced Reverse Proof silver American Eagle

Louis Vuitton designer declares Trump 'a joke' after Texas workshop visit

184 House Republicans Back Bill to Censure Adam Schiff Ahead of Monday Vote

Greta Van Susteren: Fox News’ Wallace Wants to ‘Smear and Cause Trouble’ with Anonymous Impeachment Claim

Trump Will Win in 2020 *Because* of Impeachment

Florida Cops Went to Absurd Lengths to Entrap Man Who Showed No Interest in Underage Sex

Report: CIA Deep State Actors Linked to Origin of Russia Hoax Lawyer Up

Poll: Iowa caucuses are 'up for grabs' as Pete Buttigieg surges into top tier

Mitt Romney's secret Twitter account Pierre Delecto reveales

Durham’s Trail Leading to SSCI – Ali Watkins Never Slept With James Wolfe – It Was a Cover Story….

New Democrat Icon Mitt Romney Prepares to Unseat Donald Trump

Automotive Pre-Emption

Should You Get A Flu Shot?

Mifsud’s Phones Obtained by Durham Have UK Sim Cards Tying Them to the UK — AND BACK TO JOHN BRENNAN

Napolitano Wrong Again: Schiff Inquiry a Kangaroo Court

World's longest nonstop commercial flight lands in Sydney

Portland Police Review Board Says It's OK For Officers To Lie To Get Someone To Stop Filming Them

The Founding Father Who Told Americans We Have A Right To Military Weapons

A Colorado officer shot an armed man through the window of the man's home, police say

The Gun in Atatiana Jefferson’s Hand Will Be Far from Irrelevant

Gabbard says Clinton 'Russian asset' remarks are part of 'smear campaign' as 2020 Dems voice support

Elijah Cummings' widow expected to run for his House seat: report

‘I’ll Shoot You In The F—king Face’: Video Shows Cop Threaten to Murder 16yo Boy

Cops Walk Up to Family’s Home Unannounced, Shoot Dad in the Back Through a Window

Whoa! LOUISIANA ELECTION.Exit Polls!!!


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles

Title: Ninth Circuit Upholds Its Previous Declaration That Cops Stealing Your Stuff Doesn't Violate The Constitution
Source: TechDirt
URL Source: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2 ... snt-violate-constitution.shtml
Published: Sep 16, 2019
Author: Tim Cushing
Post Date: 2019-09-19 05:46:48 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 34

from the and-cops-are-still-not-on-notice-they-can't-just-steal-stuff dept

Earlier this spring, the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court basically said it's okay for cops to steal property from citizens. This isn't because stealing is okay. It isn't. It's illegal. It's that stealing someone's possessions after they've been seized with a warrant doesn't violate the Constitution.

In this case, officers, who were engaged in an illegal gambling investigation, raided a couple's home, walking away with far more property than they officially said they did:

Following the search, the City Officers gave Appellants an inventory sheet stating that they seized approximately $50,000 from the properties. Appellants allege, however, that the officers actually seized $151,380 in cash and another $125,000 in rare coins. Appellants claim that the City Officers stole the difference between the amount listed on the inventory sheet and the amount that was actually seized from the properties.

Despite it being apparently obvious that being illegally stripped of personal possessions would interfere with a person's direct interest in the property they no longer have, the court extended qualified immunity to the officers. It reasoned that theft, while illegal, isn't unconstitutional, even when it's the government stealing from citizens.

The panel determined that at the time of the incident, there was no clearly established law holding that officers violate the Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment when they steal property that is seized pursuant to a warrant.

The Ninth Circuit then withdrew this opinion, suggesting it may have had second thoughts about allowing officers to engage in theft so long as they have a warrant. It needn't have bothered. The superseding opinion [PDF] changes nothing. It points out that only one other circuit has reached the conclusion that theft by law enforcement officers violates the Constitution, but that opinion was unpublished, which means it simply doesn't count.

Since there's no precedent out there in the federal court system, the Ninth isn't going to go out of its way to create some.

We have never addressed whether the theft of property covered by the terms of a search warrant, and seized pursuant to that warrant, violates the Fourth Amendment. The only circuit that has addressed that question—the Fourth Circuit—concluded in an unpublished decision that it does. See Mom’s Inc. v. Willman, 109 F. App’x 629, 636–37 (4th Cir. 2004).

Not addressing it now means having to write ridiculous paragraphs like this in order to prevent officers from being sued for stealing stuff during searches.

We recognize that the allegation of any theft by police officers—most certainly the theft of over $225,000—is deeply disturbing. Whether that conduct violates the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures, however, would not “be ‘clear to a reasonable officer.’”

I'm pretty sure the officers knew it was wrong to steal. It's a thing pretty much everyone knows. That they wouldn't have been "on notice" that it violated the Constitution seems almost beside the point. But since the officers raised a qualified immunity defense, we're left with this absurd outcome.

Appellants have failed to show that it was clearly established that the City Officers’ alleged conduct violated the Fourth Amendment. Accordingly, we hold that the City Officers are protected by qualified immunity against Appellants’ Fourth Amendment claim.

The court recognizes what it's doing. But it claims to be bound by [checks notes] lack of precedent, which makes this footnote's recognition of the obvious especially meaningless.

Importantly, we observe that the technical legal question of whether the theft of property covered by the terms of a search warrant, and seized pursuant to that warrant, violates the Fourth Amendment is a different question from whether theft is morally wrong. We recognize that theft is morally wrong, and acknowledge that virtually every human society teaches that theft generally is morally wrong. That principle does not, however, answer the legal question presented in this case.

Unfortunately, this closing statement is still true.

Not all conduct that is improper or morally wrong, however, violates the Constitution.

But when the conduct involves government employees illegally depriving people of their belongings, it would seem to violate the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The search may be protected by a valid warrant, but making off with property that isn't targeted (or even present on the inventory sheet) sure sounds like an unreasonable seizure.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com