Can you provide a reference where you have seen someone take this stance? I personally have never seen it, and I think I know a lot of pro police types. I think most pro police types would see this as corruption.
2016 essay by the president of the Fraternal Order of Police arguing against civil forfeiture reform.
> The FOP does not disagree that there is a need for civil asset forfeiture reform. In fact, we worked very closely with Senator Jeff Sessions on this issue going back to the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA) of 2000.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sessions-signals-more-police-pr...
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, one of civil forfeiture's biggest fans, reinstates aggressive federal policies.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bernie-madoff-and-the-case-for-...
2017 essay by then Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein praising civil forfeiture and arguing reform is not necessary.
> Some critics claim that civil asset forfeiture fails to protect property rights or provide due process. The truth is that there are multiple levels of judicial protection, as well as administrative safeguards.
https://fedsoc.org/commentary/publications/forfeiture-is-rea...
So, no.
I posted that link in response to an inquiry for a single source in support of civil forfeiture. While I happen to agree with the general thrust of your complaint, it is a non sequitur. The Supreme Court is the ultimate authority, provided a Congress unwilling to hold them accountable (which it currently is).
My question of 'credibility' is not "do you like the Federalist Society" but "do you think they're in political alignment with the Thin Blue Liners and are they writing policy."
Incidentally, I'm not sure he's familiar with the second half of the idiom ("spoils the whole bunch").
And then you have the license plates and stickers and whatnot.