This kind of hearing wouldn't be extremely expensive unless it involved some complexities like an "innocent owner" affirmative defense.
Sure, if the government took 500 bucks, ya they are kind of fucking you. But for 10k you should fight in court.
In that respect it's a lot less oppressive than most government civil actions. If the EPA sues you, we are talking tens of thousands in legal fees.
Though I'd support making the government pay attorneys fees in cases where the money was found not to be illegal. That should prevent government from just going around and stealing money in bad faith.
I skimmed it, but it appears the Court is saying that Michigan is not required to have an innocent owner defense. That isn't the same as saying there can never be an innocent owner defense.
It is my understanding that all the federal civil forfeiture statues included their own innocent owner defense since the 1970s when civil forfeiture was applied to drugs.
The new statute removed ambiguities and created a uniform defense for all federal civil forfeitures.
Sure, if the government took 500 bucks, ya they are kind of fucking you. But for 10k you should fight in court.
In that respect it's a lot less oppressive than most government civil actions. If the EPA sues you, we are talking tens of thousands in legal fees.
Though I'd support making the government pay attorneys fees in cases where the money was found not to be illegal. That should prevent government from just going around and stealing money in bad faith.