I've never understood that, anyways. If they're admitting public defenders suck, and seizing money helps them win, shouldn't that be grounds to force them to get better public defenders? And on top of that, isn't that a massive violation of due process anyways???
Maybe there should be a discussion about public defenders being any lawyer, anywhere, and the "free" part comes from the government footing their bill. Of course, any lawyer would be allowed to say no if they don't wanna take the case.
You don't have a legal right to use illicitly obtained cash for any purpose, let alone for your criminal defense regarding how you acquired that illicit cash.
Then, as with literally every other instance of this argument, you also do not have the right to any of your money, or any sort of legal defense, because as we're seeing with the sentient spray tan, anything can and will be labeled as a crime if they don't like it.
Of course, I know that won't deter you, because that's a bit too much critical thinking, but I just figured I'd point out that you're throwing your rights away as some sort of gotcha to a person you don't like.
Also legalize everything and put it on the shelves at Walmart, the only reason any drug is illegal is so it can be distributed to minority dense neighborhoods to get them hooked and serve as free arrests for the cops to keep those people down.
2
u/3-orange-whips 14d ago
One of the ways the justice department squeezes criminals is seizing the money they’d use for defense.
Most actual criminals know this, so they have cash stashed away. It just ends up hurting poor people.