SCRANTON TIMES TRIBUNE Editorial: The most striking thing about a drug case that has exposed the state’s draconian property forfeiture law is that it is not even the most extreme example.
Commonwealth Court Judge Dan Pellegrini recently called the state’s civil asset forfeiture law a vehicle for “state-sanctioned theft.” He ordered a lower court to re-examine the forfeiture case that led to the appeal.
The state attorney general’s office might first appeal the case to the Supreme Court but it should refrain. Instead, the state Legislature should conduct a comprehensive examination of the law to make it fair.
State law allows authorities to seize any property involved in an illegal drug transaction, and requires only a summary judgment, meaning that a judge can approve a property seizure without so much as a hearing…
Click here to read the full article.
Seems to me the state is exercising authority similar to the IRS. As one who watched his sister abuse drugs for years I am for tough drug laws but we should at least be allowed a hearing as long as accompanying mandatory penalties are required. It’s an accountability thing.