Alabama civil asset forfeiture law and process upheld by SCOTUS
Attorney General Steve Marshall applauded the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 opinion protecting the traditional law enforcement power to seize contraband and the proceeds and instrumentalities of crime. Alabama Solicitor General Edmund LaCour argued the case Culley v. Marshall in the Supreme Court on October 30, 2023. In a statement, Marshall said, “The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed our previous victories in these cases. Law enforcement officers across Alabama work hard every day to keep their fellow citizens safe while respecting their constitutional rights. And the Court confirmed that those rights were respected.” The two plaintiffs had each loaned their cars to men who were stopped and arrested when Alabama police found controlled substances in their cars. According to court documents, “The State of Alabama filed a forfeiture complaint against Halina Culley’s car on February 27, 2019, just 10 days after the seizure of the car. But Culley waited six months before answering that complaint. And she waited another year—until September 21, 2020—before raising an innocent owner defense in a motion for summary judgment. Soon thereafter, on October 30, 2020, an Alabama state court granted Culley’s motion and ordered the return of her car. Lena Sutton similarly moved slowly in her forfeiture proceeding. Alabama brought a forfeiture case against Sutton’s car on March 6, 2019, just 13 days after the seizure of the car. Sutton initially failed to appear in the case, causing the state court to enter a default judgment for Alabama. Sutton later requested that the state court set aside that judgment, and the state court did so. Sutton then submitted a brief answer and served discovery requests on Alabama, but Sutton otherwise took no action until the state court set a date for the forfeiture trial. On April 10, 2020, three weeks before the scheduled trial date, Sutton finally moved for summary judgment on the ground that she was an innocent owner. Soon thereafter, on May 28, 2020, the state court granted her motion, and she recovered her car” The Attorney General’s office noted, that under Alabama law, “vehicles used to facilitate the transportation of controlled substances may be forfeited upon proper process. But if the owner of a seized vehicle is found to be innocent at a hearing, the property is returned. In these cases, the plaintiffs had access to the full protections of the judicial system within days. Still, they claimed a constitutional right to yet another hearing, which Alabama argued ‘would interfere with important law-enforcement activities” and risk property being “removed, destroyed, or put to illegal use.’ Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s majority opinion agreed with Alabama’s understanding of the Due Process Clause and affirmed the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, dismissing the case.” In his statement, Marshall thanked the team who successfully litigated these cases from the district court to the Supreme Court, including Solicitor General Edmund LaCour, Deputy Solicitor General Robert Overing, Assistant Chief Deputy Attorney General Brad Chynoweth, and Assistant Attorney General Brenton Smith.
Steve Marshall joins 25 other Attorney Generals to fight Joe Biden’s proposed gun rule
Twenty-six states sued the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives on Wednesday, arguing a new federal rule it’s implementing targets lawful gun owners and is unconstitutional and illegal. Texas and Kansas led two multi-state coalitions with Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall joining the Kansas coalition; Florida filed its own lawsuit. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach announced their multi-state coalitions at a joint press conference in Frisco, Texas, on Wednesday. The announcement was the first time Paxton has held a press conference about official state business since he was impeached last year. Paxton was the first Texas attorney general to be impeached in state history after 60 Texas House Republicans joined nearly all Democrats to vote to impeach him on 20 counts. He was acquitted by the Senate last September. The states sued the ATF and the Department of Justice and their effective heads over a new ATF rule the Biden administration finalized on April 19. The administration argues the rule is implementing aspects of the 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act spearheaded by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. President Joe Biden has called for Congress to enact so-called “universal background check” legislation, which would require every private firearms transaction to be regulated by the federal government. Congress, under Democratic and Republican leadership, has repeatedly declined to do so. For decades, federal law has distinguished between firearms dealers, who are required to have a federal license to sell firearms, and private individuals who are not required to have a license to purchase and sell firearms privately. Claiming the new law as the basis for the rule, the ATF measure would require thousands of law-abiding citizens to register as dealers to buy, sell or trade firearms with friends and neighbors. The Republican attorneys general argue the rule is unconstitutional and burdens citizens with unnecessary costs. The Texas coalition includes Louisiana, Missouri, and Utah. Their lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court Northern District of Texas Amarillo Division. The Kansas coalition includes Arkansas, Iowa, Montana, Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Their lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas Delta Division. Both lawsuits have gun owners included as plaintiffs. The Kansas coalition included newly re-elected NRA board member Judge Phil Journey. “Yet again, Joe Biden is weaponizing the federal bureaucracy to rip up the Constitution and destroy our citizens’ Second Amendment rights,” Paxton said. “This is a dramatic escalation of his tyrannical abuse of authority. With today’s lawsuit, it is my great honor to defend our Constitutionally-protected freedoms from the out-of-control federal government.” Kobach said, “Biden’s latest attempt to strip away the Second Amendment rights of Americans through ATF regulations will make many law-abiding gun owners felons if they sell a firearm or two to family or friends. This rule is blatantly unconstitutional. We are suing to defend the Second Amendment rights of all Americans.” In a separate statement, Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody said the rule was President Biden’s “latest step in trying to take guns away from law-abiding Americans. We are fighting back against this federal overreach that would force thousands of law-abiding gun owners to register as federal firearms dealers and navigate a federal bureaucracy. It’s unlawful and reflects a lack of respect for our Second Amendment rights. We won’t stand for it.” Florida sued in U.S. District Court Middle District of Florida Tampa Division. Its 16-page brief states the rule “goes far beyond the plain text of the BSCA. It purports to force thousands of law-abiding gun owners to register as federal firearms dealers and navigate a federal bureaucracy as a precondition to engaging in constitutionally protected activity. The challenged rule is unlawful…ATF does not have authority to promulgate it because ATF’s rulemaking authority is carefully circumscribed. But even if it did, the challenged rule unlawfully attempts to depart from the plain meaning of the BSCA to achieve President Biden’s policy goals.” All three lawsuits named the ATF, the Department of Justice, and their respective heads as defendants. They ask the courts to rule that the ATF rule is unlawful and to permanently enjoin the ATF from implementing it. This article was published with permission from The Center Square.
