>> I wish the law required that LEOs who steal people's stuff to be automatically criminally charged for theft upon the overturn of civil asset forfeiture
At that point the defense would be Qualified Immunity.
At that point the defense would be Qualified Immunity.
People have started to try to apply Eminent Domain to the Qualified Immunity defense [1]. They're not disputing that you are a LEO acting in official government capacity but Eminent Domain requires that you compensate a private party for use of their stuff.
https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/investigates/police-...
Note: IANAL, I'm a complete layperson.
From what I could understand it sounds like 4 other district courts have ruled (around 31:30) on similar issues by siding that Eminent Domain does not apply on police actions while 4th has apparently ruled differently (I do not know which case they are referring to) & there were some arguments that earlier John Corp case from 5th Circuit (I believe https://casetext.com/case/john-corp-v-city-of-houston) already split the district courts.
To me it did sound like judges were taking the city side more though they did also ask for what kind of test should be implemented if they did rule in favor of Bakers.
Hopefully they do end up affirming the lower court decision but let's see.