If a Police Dog "Alerts," Should You Lose Your Cash, Car and Other Property?YouTubeOct. 17, 2012 |
Claim Jewish Student Was 'Stabbed In The Eye' by Pro-Palestine Protester Draws Mockery After Video Released
Mike Johnson Pushes Debunked Lie That Israeli Babies Were 'Cooked in Ovens' On October 7
'These Protesters Belong in Jail': Gov. Abbott Cheers Arrest of Pro-Palestine Protesters at UT Austin
Senate Passes $95B Giveaway to Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan, Combined With TikTok Ban
'It Has to Be Stopped': Netanyahu Demands Pro-Palestine Protests at U.S. Colleges Be Shut Down
Should the government be allowed to search and seize your possessions based on nothing more than a positive "alert" from a drug-sniffing dog? The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires police, in most situations, to have what is known as a "probable cause" (a reasonable belief based on sufficient facts) before they can search or seize property. Increasingly, however, police have been using drug-sniffing dogs to establish probable cause to seize, and ultimately keep through civil forfeiture, cash, cars and other property on the grounds that the property may be linked to a drug crime. IJ attorneys Darpana Sheth and Scott Bullock explain IJ's new amicus brief about civil forfeiture. Learn more at this link: http://www.ij.org/florida-v-harris-amicus Read the brief here: http://www.ij.org/images/pdf_folder/amicus_briefs/fl-v-harris-amicus.pdf |