Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

usatoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–79 of 79 posts

Re: DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

#71

Post by marcosdumay »

mindslight wrote: post #15
emodendroket wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Asset forfeiture is more of a travesty than money "laundering" being a crime is. I'm not sure why it's a travesty that it's illegal to conceal the source of illegally-earned money.

The entire purpose of money is to be fungible. $1 is worth exactly the same as another $1. Inventing the crime of "money laundering" erodes the very concept of money by making its exchange value dependent on who you know and how politically connected they are. Furthermore, forcing people to structure their activities to be legible to the government is making everybody work as an informant against themselves.

By one perspective, I'm always welcoming laws that make it harder for corrupt politicians to do their things, while having only mild effects on honest citizens.

By another perspective, your comment is spot on, and it destroys a fundamental theoretical characteristic of money.

By yet another perspective, the more recent versions of those laws make it just too easy for governments to spy on every citizen. Although it is not as bad as spying on communications, it can become very bad in the future.

And, finally, by another perspective, I can't recall a single politician caught by the information those laws make available. And I live in Brazil - I've already lost count of the politician arrests of this week.

Re: DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

#72

Post by gumby »

dmayle wrote: post #36

There is no world where this practice could pass constitutional review. What they are doing is called out as unconstitutional in no less than three (!!!) different amendments. At this point in time, the supreme court should be buckling under the weight of requests to review this practice, and have it struck down as un-American. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons , houses, papers, and effects again…

I like to think so too but the US Supreme Court has sanctioned civil forfeiture on more than one occasion and their decision is, by definition, constitutionally consistent. (Which is not to say that a future court couldn't reverse it, but I don't recommend you hold your breath waiting for that).

However congress could pass laws forbidding it. That is also constitutionally valid.

Re: DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

#73

Post by Torgo »

marcosdumay wrote: post #71
mindslight wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire purpose of money is to be fungible. $1 is worth exactly the same as another $1. Inventing the crime of "money laundering" erodes the very concept of money by making its exchange value dependent on who you know and how politically connected they are. Furthermore, forcing people to structure their activities to be legible to the government is making everybody work as an informant against themselves.

By one perspective, I'm always welcoming laws that make it harder for corrupt politicians to do their things, while having only mild effects on honest citizens. By another perspective, your comment is spot on, and it destroys a fundamental theoretical characteristic of money. By yet another perspective, the more recent versions of those laws make it just too easy for governments to spy on every citizen. Although it i…

Eliot Spitzer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliot_Spitzer_prostitution_sca...

Just not for the actual purpose of the law, haha. Which probably strengthens your argument.

Re: DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

#74

Post by senorprogrammer »

dragonwriter wrote: post #40
senorprogrammer wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue the fundamental problem is that 'civil forfeiture' is 'guilty until proven innocent', an inversion of the way the rule of law is meant to work. Requiring charges is a very small step in the right direction. I suspect what will happen is that people with money will now be charged for small, ridiculous offences, misdemeanours, as a way for law enforcement to skirt the law. A real improvement is to seize, hold…

> I'd argue the fundamental problem is that 'civil forfeiture' is 'guilty until proven innocent', an inversion of the way the rule of law is meant to work. That's not an inversion of the way "the rule of law" is supposed to work, its an inversion of the way criminal punishment is supposed to work, because of the particular character of criminal sanction. But civil forfeiture isn't criminal punishment, and doesn't hav…

That's a great clarification. Thanks for that!

I'd argue that while it may technically not be "criminal punishment", that is ultimately the final outcome. People for whom a criminal conviction cannot be guaranteed are instead "punished" by having their goods taken. However IANAL, and that is simply my perception of the effect.

Re: DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

#75

Post by wldcordeiro »

Retric wrote: post #29
wldcordeiro wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had an acquaintance that had the police seize $10k in cash from him after he had gotten in a car accident, along with bags of clothing he had bought at the mall. After court and everything the clothing was never reported and the $10k became $4k. It's not just money they'll take, it's anything of value they feel like.

Used to be people would wait a while, and then go and shoot people who did this. I can't decide if it's progress that people no longer consider this reasonable.

I think the thing I was trying to point out is that while there is the legal theft that goes under the guise of civil forfeiture there's also plenty that I feel goes unnoticed by officers acting independently of the bureaucracy.

Re: DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

#76

Post by sathackr »

DannyBee wrote: post #59
20yrs_no_equity wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The language of the constitution is pretty clear. So what this says to me is that the Supreme Court is not enforcing the constitution. While these thefts are disturbing, this lack of accountability from the Supreme Court will ultimately lead to much worse crimes.

The problem for you is that the supreme court has the final say on what the constitution means. So for you to say "Supreme Court is not enforcing the constitution" doesn't make a lot of sense. They get to say what it means, so they are "enforcing" the constitution almost by definition. (this is probably not a great word to use since they rely on other branches, like the executive, to enforce things. They can order st…

> Congress passes a law to overrule the supreme court, or the country pass an amendment to do it. This has happened numerous times before.

But then the Supreme Court gets to interpret that law also. I don't see how you could possibly more clearly state what the previously quoted amendments already state.

Since it already failed(or succeeded, depending on which side you're on) in it's interpretation of the 4th/5th/14th amendments, I have zero confidence it would properly interpret any other amendment or law addressing the issue.

Re: DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

#77

Post by emodendroket »

ubernostrum wrote: post #42
emodendroket wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Asset forfeiture is more of a travesty than money "laundering" being a crime is. I'm not sure why it's a travesty that it's illegal to conceal the source of illegally-earned money.

People here seem to be of the opinion that we have a system and process for prosecuting people suspected of crimes, and should use it rather than inventing a separate procedure with radically lower burden of proof and significantly less due process for the person involved. In other words: if someone's suspected of money laundering, charge them with money laundering, convict them of it and then seize the money after t…

I agree with that, but the parent comment is specifically suggesting that money laundering should not be a crime.

Re: DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

#78

Post by emodendroket »

didgeoridoo wrote: post #17
emodendroket wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Asset forfeiture is more of a travesty than money "laundering" being a crime is. I'm not sure why it's a travesty that it's illegal to conceal the source of illegally-earned money.

Because "nor shall any person... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...". 5th Amendment to the Constitution. Unless you think "due process" == "Because I said so", it is both legally and morally a travesty.

Yes. Money laundering is a crime, tried in normal courts.

Re: DEA regularly mines Americans' travel records to seize millions in cash

#79

Post by emodendroket »

pc86 wrote: post #33
emodendroket wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Asset forfeiture is more of a travesty than money "laundering" being a crime is. I'm not sure why it's a travesty that it's illegal to conceal the source of illegally-earned money.

Money laundering doesn't care if the source is illegal. I can earn money working a regular, taxed job, and if I take steps to conceal the source of that money I will go to prison.

I'm not a lawyer, but this is what WP says:

> The law, contained at section 1956 of Title 18 of the United States Code, prohibits individuals from engaging in a financial transaction with proceeds that were generated from certain specific crimes, known as "specified unlawful activities" (SUAs). The law requires that an individual specifically intend in making the transaction to conceal the source, ownership or control of the funds.

Post reply on HN