It is policy like this that has caused the slippery slope into a society that will be cashless and 100% monitored. The immediate seizure of cash and property is honestly similar to income tax though. It is so ingrained in us that we find it acceptable to receive a tax "refund" more than a year after we began paying into our annual interest free loan to the government. While this is not mandated like the seizure is, since you can manually adjust how much taxes you pay, most people don't and lending the government money with the expectation that they will return what the individual did not actually owe is the norm. And frankly, this is just scratching the surface on taxes, there are much more foundational issues. Triggers that lead to seizure are set so low ($15,000) that it makes you wonder how the federal government is even managing the tracking of this and the requisite forms to avoid trouble.

Absolutely right no one is above the law arrest charge trial and convict. Oh and seize the Clinton crime cartels money.

It's about time someone challenged this policy as a violation of the 4th amendment.

That policy has been horribly abused in the past.
As for explaining that policy continuing, that's simple. Sessions freaking wants it.
From what I've heard and read in the news, Sessions may not be around for long.
It appears Trump is trying to psychological nudge him toward a voluntary resignation.
But me dino could be wrong . . .
By the way~speaking of bad apples?~IMO, both Holder and the former Traitor-In-Chief belong behind bars along with Lynch, Lerner, the Evil Hag and a bunch of other aiding and abetting socialist control freak jackasses.

Asset forfeiture should be abolished IMMEDIATELY. It is outright theft. The only thing we have to protect ourselves is- what they cant find, they cant take.

2 is the only one that sounds like it has a shot to me. I have reasons to believe all the other ones would fail.

If your hypothesis is Holder was just a bad apple, how do you explain the policy of asset forfeiture continuing?

Eric Holder also "gently restricted" Fast And Furious too in a botched attempt (with some oh-so collateral damage) to make American legal gun sales businesses look bad.
Yeah, progressively fascist Gentle Eric was all about (choke! gag! ack! ack!) gently restricting stuff~
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2...

I can only think of four ways "to limit gov't powers like this."
1) The ballot box
2) An Article V convention
3) About 12% of borrowers and taxpayers withholding payments and taxes
4) Armed revolution

Can you think of any other ways?

It is odd. If I were hired to represent Lynch's or Sessions' public image, I'd have to look for little pieces of evidence that the other is worse or that my client used this gov't power more responsibly. For public consumption at least mentioning tu quoque might be helpful. I don't work in that industry, thankfully, so I just want to find some way to limit gov't powers like this.

You're welcome and absolutely correct.

Particularly galling was this site calls itself Conservative and contained this sentence "The controversial process in which police can not only seize property like cars and cash they suspect are connected to a crime, but profit from it too, was gently restricted at the federal level by former-Obama Attorney General Eric Holder. " "gently restricted" ??? As if Holder was John Locke reborn in his enthusiasm for Individual Rights.

Thanks for noting the guilt of the previous administrations.

The people who hold power in DC are rotten to the core. Dem or GOP (or any other) alignment does not convey innocence. The record of betrayal is filled with liars and looters from both major parties. I agree that this is another example.

Odd in that no mention is made of AG Loretta Lynch's enthusiasm for CAF https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgele...