Government Seizing Property During Covid-19

[KSMH]

https://twitter.com/TheBelaaz/status/1253076799761891331

[aygart]

This will end up in an eminent domain lawsuit of how to calculate "just compensation"

[hvaces42]

This will end up in an eminent domain lawsuit of how to calculate "just compensation"

Thats not eminent domain...thats an illegal search and seizure. Loads more money than just compensation.

[NTorch]

This will end up in an eminent domain lawsuit of how to calculate "just compensation"

There needs to be enough money in it for the attorney. And if they really are paying above cost, it wont be an easy case.

[NTorch]

Thats not eminent domain...thats an illegal search and seizure. Loads more money than just compensation.

I don't agree - this is not a 4th Amendment case.

[KSMH]

This will end up in an eminent domain lawsuit of how to calculate "just compensation"

If the owner is ready to fight.
Not necessarily under eminent domain but under a host of other laws and case law.

Sadly one of two things usually happens

1. The government finds a crime to charge the person with, will cut a deal or pursue the charges. Maybe he coughed during a conversation and then the 302 has some words that were never said.
2. The correct owner is scared to fight the government, he might have something off in his books.

[hvaces42]

If the owner is ready to fight.
Not necessarily under eminent domain but under a host of other laws and case law.

Sadly one of two things usually happens

1. The government finds a crime to charge the person with, will cut a deal or pursue the charges. Maybe he coughed during a conversation and then the 302 has some words that were never said.
2. The correct owner is scared to fight the government, he might have something off in his books.

What? This is a civil matter. People sue the government every day.

I don't agree - this is not a 4th Amendment case.

So they show  probable cause for the search. How do you justify the seizure? I dont think there is an exception for emergency. 

[KSMH]

What? This is a civil matter. People sue the government every day.
So they show  probable cause for the search. How do you justify the seizure? I dont think there is an exception for emergency.

When the FBI arrives the way they did, it scares the hell out of people. Just a fact.
People sue every day, but many are scared and don't.

Most times LE searches there is no probable cause or warrant. They just get permission, stupidly given.

[aygart]

What? This is a civil matter. People sue the government every day.
So they show  probable cause for the search. How do you justify the seizure? I dont think there is an exception for emergency.

Why isn't this a simple eminent domain case?

[KSMH]

On the chats I am on in the morning everyone was thinking there coming to arrest now I’m hearing that the FBI yes the FBI are coming purchasers and buying N95 masks and paying 6 bucks a pop.

Anyone on here can confirm?

Who said it's not a trap? Dont know, just bringing up the possibility.

Always work thru a lawyer when dealing with the FBI. Period. People thought/think they were/are smarter but learn the hard way.

Just say;
 "On  the advice  of  my lawyer,  I respectfully decline to answer on the basis of  the Fifth Amendment, which—according to the United  States  Supreme  Court—protects  everyone, even innocent people, from the need to answer questions if  the truth might be used to help create the misleading impression that they were somehow involved in a crime that they did not commit."

Have your lawyer talk and deal with them.

Never let them enter your buisness without a warrant.

Trust whomever you want, it's not worth the 6x.....

[NTorch]

Why isn't this a simple eminent domain case?

The power to requisition private property for war purposes is an essential attribute of sovereignty. 67 C.J., 373. Although broader than the peace-time power of eminent domain in that it is not subject to the constitutional inhibition against taking property without compensation, its exercise implies a contract to reimburse the owner.

[NTorch]

Who said it's not a trap? Dont know, just bringing up the possibility.

Always work thru a lawyer when dealing with the FBI. Period. People thought/think they were/are smarter but learn the hard way.

Just say;
 "On  the advice  of  my lawyer,  I respectfully decline to answer on the basis of  the Fifth Amendment, which—according to the United  States  Supreme  Court—protects  everyone, even innocent people, from the need to answer questions if  the truth might be used to help create the misleading impression that they were somehow involved in a crime that they did not commit."

Have your lawyer talk and deal with them.

Never let them enter your buisness without a warrant.

Trust whomever you want, it's not worth the 6x.....

The 5th Amendment protects your right against self-incrimination. It has nothing to do with the government seizing property under an executive order or as required in an emergency situation.

Yes, you don't have to discuss it with them and you don't have to answer any questions. But they don't need a warrant to take it (that's only for non-exigent searches & seizures), you just have a right to be compensated down the road.

[aygart]

Where are you quoting from

[KSMH]

The 5th Amendment protects your right against self-incrimination. It has nothing to do with the government seizing property under an executive order or as required in an emergency situation.

Yes, you don't have to discuss it with them and you don't have to answer any questions. But they don't need a warrant to take it (that's only for non-exigent searches & seizures), you just have a right to be compensated down the road.

They need a warrant to enter private property.


I mentioned 2 different topics.
1. Allowing someone to enter your property.
2. Talking to authority.

[NTorch]

Where are you quoting from

Fletcher v. Maupin, 129 F.2d 46 (D.C. Cir. 1942)

[NTorch]

Who said it's not a trap? Dont know, just bringing up the possibility.

Always work thru a lawyer when dealing with the FBI. Period. People thought/think they were/are smarter but learn the hard way.

Just say;
 "On  the advice  of  my lawyer,  I respectfully decline to answer on the basis of  the Fifth Amendment, which—according to the United  States  Supreme  Court—protects  everyone, even innocent people, from the need to answer questions if  the truth might be used to help create the misleading impression that they were somehow involved in a crime that they did not commit."

Have your lawyer talk and deal with them.

Never let them enter your buisness without a warrant.

Trust whomever you want, it's not worth the 6x.....

The 5th Amendment protects your right against self-incrimination. It has nothing to do with the government seizing property under an executive order or as required in an emergency situation.

Yes, you don't have to discuss it with them and you don't have to answer any questions. But they don't need a warrant to take it (that's only for non-exigent searches & seizures), you just have a right to be compensated down the road.

They need a warrant to enter private property.


I mentioned 2 different topics.
1. Allowing someone to enter your property.
2. Talking to authority.

I think you missed the exigent circumstances part of this. They need a warrant to enter and search your property in a non-emergency, but that does not apply when there are exigent circumstances.

By way of example, if they have probable cause to believe that someone is about to commit a dangerous crime or destroy evidence the police can enter the home (or business) without a warrant.

Similarly in a time of war or other national emergency, the government can take property it needs and pay you for it, whether you consent or not. It happened during WWII and it is happening now under executive orders from the state and federal level. You are entitled to compensation, but they don't need a warrant to take it.

[yaakovely]

They had a warrant btw. I spoke with one of the owners. They did not find any n95s which was the purpose of their visit. They did not seize any 3ply. They came with a few tractor trailers and left with them empty without making any arrests. I look at it like this, the government was going shopping for ppe. Most people I know do not go shopping armed to the teeth though

[shapsam]

They had a warrant btw. I spoke with one of the owners. They did not find any n95s which was the purpose of their visit. They did not seize any 3ply. They came with a few tractor trailers and left with them empty without making any arrests. I look at it like this, the government was going shopping for ppe. Most people I know do not go shopping armed to the teeth though

I'm curious if they tried "shopping" anywhere else besides for BP or Lakewood... It was the same FBI office by the way.

[aygart]

They had a warrant btw. I spoke with one of the owners. They did not find any n95s which was the purpose of their visit. They did not seize any 3ply. They came with a few tractor trailers and left with them empty without making any arrests. I look at it like this, the government was going shopping for ppe. Most people I know do not go shopping armed to the teeth though

They wanted to make them an offer they can't refuse.

[KSMH]

What exigent circumstances are there? Some one selling masks?

The DPA gives the government a priority over purchasing.

The government cannot enter your property because they think there are N95 masks.

They will usually approach an individual, start a conversation and ho from there trying to establish that someone has N95 masks.

If they have a reason to believe you'll be shipping out your masks, then maybe. But I highly doubt they can, a judge can easily give them a warrant. I'm guessing this needs to be litigated to fully comprehend the powers of the law.

The purpose of a warrant is that a agent has to under oath tell a truthful story that needs to be approved by a judge. If the agent enters without a warrant then any charges against an individual will have to potentially pass additional hurdles.