The right to a speedy trial isn’t for a couple of Amendments yet! (At the rate I’m going that’s probably around Christmas…..)

You are of course correct that our 4th Amendment rights have been eroding for a long time, but the War on Terror has certainly exascerbated the problem. I suspect that those who remember the McCarthy era could probably tell us more. In the end, the 4th (and 5th) Amendments are supposed to shut up anybody who says “Well if you have nothing to hide, prove it!” No sorry, it’s the other way around; if you think I’ve done something wrong, *you* have to prove it.

And yes, civil forfeiture as implemented is a bad idea almost guaranteed to be abused by greedy officials and cash-strapped municipalities. If this were really about “preventing criminals from receiving the benefits of their crimes,” the seized property would be held in escrow subject to periodic inspection by the defendant’s attorneys pending trial, and returned immediately (and in the condition they got it!) after acquittal.

I have to disagree. The amazing erosion of our Fourth Amendment rights started with the War on (Some) Drugs. The doctrine of civil forfeiture, in which the arresting authority permanently confiscates the property of the suspect without any due process at all, is such a gross violation of the Founders’ intent that my friend the Constitutional lawyer says it shook his belief that the Law actually means anything at all.

If the cops claim to find drugs in your car, they take the car, and keep it. Even if you’re ultimately acquitted, you don’t get the car back. Worse, the cops sell the car and keep the money.

But no one seems to care, because we all seem to agree that the end justifies the means if the alleged crime is sufficiently awful.