Due Process

Brandon Garrett | 2.10.2025 8:01 AM

Halima Culley's college-aged son was driving her car, and was pulled over by Satsuma, Alabama police. After a search, the officers discovered marijuana, arrested him and charged him with minor drug violations. And they seized the car as incident to arrest. Culley herself had done nothing wrong, but prosecutors filed a claim in a civil court to acquire her car, arguing that it was implicated in her son's criminal conduct. It took her almost two years to finally get that case dismissed—a long time to be left without one's vehicle.

Culley argued that due process should entitle people like her to a fair, prompt hearing, before the property was taken by the government. It should not take two years to regain one's property. In Culley's case, when it reached the Supreme Court last term, the Justices concluded that people like Culley had no due process right to such a preliminary hearing, pending the longer process to consider the forfeiture claim. The Justice did not disagree that notice and a hearing must be provided if states seize real property. In an opinion by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, they ruled, however, that no expedited or preliminary........

© Reason.com