There’s an element of self-interest involved: when foreign states arrange to participate in the seizure of property of alleged wrongdoers even absent proof that can withstand trial, it can redound as a revenue source to U.S.-based law enforcement under various cooperation schemes. But remember the days when the U.S. sought to export the rule of law, property rights and strong constitutional protections to other lands? [Eapen Thampy, Forfeiture Reform]
3 Comments
This will serve to drive indivs and corps to set up shop in those countries that cooperate the least w/the US.
I do not take Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged as gospel: the economic collapse she described could take place just as easily under a corrupt anti-Communist regime (eg. Yel’tsin’s Russia).
Nevertheless, this thread about internationalizing “forfeiture” lawlessness reminded me of a major episode in Atlas Shrugged, where corrupt US politicians connive with corrupt Latin American politicians to seize D’Anconia Copper. (The eponymous owner, a typical Randian superhero, saw it coming and had a counterstroke ready.)
Why do the right thing when the wrong thing is so much more profitable? No government ever went broke by seizing too much property.