Read between the lines; Alito's concurring comment and Thomas' dissenting comment both support a sharper delineation and addressed the more substantive issue.

The majority relied on "procedures" and "due process".

Alito focussed on the fact that they were not guilty and obviously had a right to get it back.

Thomas' dissent took the majority to task for not providing a clear opinion as to whether the category of the funds in this particular case was in the same category as attorney's fee and other costs that you clearly do no get back.

Unfortunately I don't think this case provides much of a basis for overturning civil forfeiture.

(NB I am not a lawyer; not even American!)