Thesis
When the government seizes the property of citizens through civil forfeiture, which occurs when officers take property from people suspected of crimes, they are in violation of these citizens’ 4th amendment right. Specifically, they are in violation of the 4th amendment clause against improper seizures. This paper will examine the background behind the Fourth Amendment, the history of civil forfeiture cases in the United States, three reasons against civil forfeiture, and focus on affirming Sourovelis’ argument in Sourovelis v. Philadelphia, a specific case regarding civil forfeiture in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Background
Private property is a hallmark of the American tradition and Western culture. In fact, the Declaration of Independence almost read “Life, Liberty, and Private Property” instead of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” (Hamilton, …show more content…
The main purpose of civil forfeiture was to incentivize the colonists into the complying with the British laws. According to Nelson, “Both the English Parliament and legislatures in the American colonies were using the threat of forfeiture to encourage compliance with statutes” (Nelson, 2017 p. 2457). Nelson then provides a prime example of the exercise of civil forfeiture when he discusses the Navigation Act of 1660, claiming “The Navigation Act of 1660 required that English ships be used to carry imports to and exports from the American colonies, ‘under the penalty of the forfeiture and losse of all goods and commodityes which shall be imported into, or exported out of, any the aforesaid places in any other ship or vessell” (Nelson, 2017 p. 2458). The Navigation Act was just the beginning of civil forfeiture in Pre-Revolutionary America. The British would go on to expand similar restrictions to other goods. These forfeiture laws would go on to play a sizeable role in the colonist’s decision to rebel against the British