Woman sues Albuquerque for seizing car despite ban on civil asset forfeiture

[Warpy]

2. This whole state has a horrific problem with drunk drivers

with arrests that go into the double digits. If you take their licenses, they drive without them. If you put them in jail, they hit the first bar they can find on the way out. If you put interlock devices in their cars, they'll get someone else to blow into them so they can drive away blotto.

Car confiscation was the last resort for multiple offenders. Once their own car is gone, they'll try to sweet talk some fool into lending them one so they can go get drunk and drive that way. That's why borrowed cars are confiscated.

There are hearings during which people can argue for the return of the vehicle. Many borrowed vehicles are returned. However, if it's found the person is in the habit of lending the vehicle to someone who is a habitual DWI offender, either driving drunk or continuing to drive without a license, the car is declared a public nuisance and it's gone out of their possession.

http://newmexicodwilaw.com/forfeiture.htm

With civil asset forfeiture, no one need be accused of a crime. Property is just taken because it might be used to commit a crime at some point, like that wad of cash in a traveler's pocket might go to buy dope. Nothing has to be proven and the person who's lost the property has to pay to get a hearing. That's how this is different.