U.S. judge rules government cannot seize family-owned motel

This and the rulings on Obama’s recess appointments are encouraging. There is always the temptation for those with power to try to get more done, overstep their bounds, etc. I imagine it’s easily to rationalize (mainly on the basis of some of the rules I’m tempted to make up for my kids).

Anyhow, these glimpses of the Judiciary doing its part to uphold the rule of law are a nice change from some of the activist moves by justices that often make the news.

Despicable action by the justice department. They are charged with upholding the law and couldn’t do it effectively over a period of years they decide to pin the blame on innocent citizens. It’s like a scene from a Franz Kafka novel, a modern day nightmare. The prosecutors should be charged with malicious prosecution. The government can be very scary.

So, does the motel owner get the prosecutor’s house? Do prosecutors lose anything when they try to seize an innocent person’s property? Or do they just get to keep trying this on as many people as they want without any penalty for overreaching their authority?

finally, a sensible decesion

Once again, the inJustice Department headed by Eric Holder is handed a defeat in its effort to terrorize Americans and American businesses.

Sometime, somehow, these people need to accept the rule of law or be impeached.

Look at the guy in Utah who was grieving over the death of his wife, who was still in the house, when cops came in without a warrant to seize her pain medications. Obama tried to ban Fox news from the press corps. Is America becoming a dictatorship?

Hopefully the law enforcement juggernaut hasn’t already made expenditures in expectation of liquidating this seized property. Forfeiture laws need to be revised to take out the incentive to act solely for financial gain. Or, forfeited monies and monies from property sales should be placed in the government’s general fund at the federal or state level to reduce incentives to seize.