October Term 2013 · Docket 12-464
Does probable cause justify seizing property without a hearing?
The dispute centers on whether the government can seize private property based solely on a grand jury finding of probable cause.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
the side that brought the case's counsel argued that property owners have a right to be heard.
The government's counsel argued that probable cause justifies the seizure.
Justices questioned the relationship between probable cause and property rights.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 47-15 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 47-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 39-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-17
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case involves the seizure of private property by the government. the side that brought the case argues this action requires a hearing. The government relies on the initial probable cause finding.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 47-15 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 47-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 16, 2013.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants a hearing before the government seizes their property.
The government wants to seize property based only on probable cause.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 47-15 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 47-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues property owners have a right to be heard before seizure.
The government argues probable cause is sufficient justification for seizure.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 47-15 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 47-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if probable cause equates to the weight of evidence in bail decisions.
Justice Roberts asked if property deserves greater protection to hire counsel for release.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 39-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-17
Why it matters
This case defines the balance between government power and private property rights. It determines when citizens can challenge the seizure of their assets. The outcome shapes the scope of due process protections for property owners.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 47-15 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 47-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 39-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-17
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 47-15 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 47-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 47-15 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 47-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.