The Supreme Court's decision in Bennis v. Michigan depriving Tina Bennis of her car struck many as an unfair application of civil forfeiture law. In this note, Erik Luna argues that the Court's justifications for its decision are utterly indefensible. Luna comments that the Court failed to consider fairness or justice and was blind to the severity of Ms. Bennis' loss. Luna warns that the decision could have adverse consequences on marginal credit candidates and lead to more alarming applications of civil forfeiture in the future.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||1|
|Journal||Stanford Law Review|
|State||Published - Jan 1 1997|
ASJC Scopus subject areas