The issue that should bridge the aisle
In a time of growing polarization, it would seem there's little to nothing on which political opponents can agree. I differ in that opinion because I have found myself in agreement with those who stand as far to the right, if not further than I am in the opposite direction but mainly on one key issue.
Civil Asset Forfeiture. Law enforcement is able to seize property from those neither charged nor convicted of a crime and the repossession of these citizens' property is normally a difficult process. It is civil action against citizens' property, no judge or jury involved and their property is presumed guilty.
By my reckoning it violates the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states "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.
Current AG Jeff Sessions is gung ho to ramp up the free-flowing lucre.
"We hope to issue this week a new directive on asset forfeiture -especially for drug traffickers," Sessions said in his prepared remarks for a speech to the National District Attorney's Association in Minneapolis. "With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures. No criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime. Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate as is sharing with our partners."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/17/jeff-sessions-wants-police-to-take-more-cash-from-american-citizens/?utm_term=.2e33d66fa7c0
So if Sessions is going full blazes on this doesn't it mean the right wing is all for it? Not necessarily so.
The libertarians way, way out on the right hate it. Reason magazine has long criticized the practice. They referenced a recent study which discovered law enforcement grabbing as much as they can as often as they can because they have the leeway.
https://reason.com/blog/2017/07/15/report-average-asset-forfeiture-just-103
"Most forfeitures (69 percent) take place during traffic stops and most of the time only money is seized. According to the state report, cash was taken in 99 percent of forfeitures during 2016, with the median seizure amounting to only $1,031. That means, in many cases, the amount seized was considerably less than four-figures. In one instance, the report shows, police took $16 from a motorist.
"'What are they doing where they have to take that $16 to protect public safety,' says Jennifer McDonald, a research analyst for the Institute for Justice, a libertarian law firm that has challenged asset forfeiture laws in several states and advocates for reforms to the practice.
"As in other places -- like in Chicago, where cops have seized as little as 34 cents from motorists and targeted poor neighborhoods with forfeiture actions -- the amount of the average seizure raises questions about how forfeiture is being used.
No one is going to court to haggle over amounts that small. It's too costly for the sum in question. Those pennies add up for law enforcement, too.
The Washington Post ran this story announcing that asset forfeiture totals surpassed the amount lost in burglaries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/?utm_term=.e52f63952a21
In the funniest irony, I found this 2015 story in right-wing outlet The Daily Caller using a chastisement of Loretta Lynch as pretext for listing seven of the most egregious asset seizure cases they could find. I somehow think they've grown silent with America's most bitter elf in the AG's seat.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/30/the-7-most-egregious-examples-of-civil-asset-forfeiture/
However, it's easy to see there are enough offended sensibilities on both sides of the aisle to possibly make headway on turning back this illegal activity.
= new reply since forum marked as read
