SCOTUS Rejects Guilty Until Proven Innocent – Can't Keep Money from the Innocent

Re:SCOTUS Rejects Guilty Until Proven Innocent – Can't Keep ... by lisper on Wednesday May 03, 2017 @07:44PM (#14261249)

OK, trial by Jury, as provided in both the 6th and 7th amendments, is definitely a positive right even on that definition.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SCOTUS Rejects Guilty Until Proven Innocent – Can't Keep ... by humanrebar on Thursday May 04, 2017 @05:13AM (#14263574)

Almost, but really it's specifying conditions by which the government can revoke negative rights to life, liberty, property, etc.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SCOTUS Rejects Guilty Until Proven Innocent – Can't Keep ... by lisper on Thursday May 04, 2017 @11:20AM (#14265453)

Let's not get lost in the weeds here. The question at hand is: The government takes my money because they think I committed a crime. The government is later proven to be wrong. Do I have a right to get the money they took back?

To me this is a total no-brainer: the answer is obviously yes, notwithstanding that the Constitution does not explicitly say so. I don't see any point in quibbling over what flavor of right this is.

[ Parent | on HN ]