March 2001 Volume 10 Issue 2 Inside This Issue Illinois School Choice Asset Forfeiture Victory 2 Victory IJ’s Chairman of the Board Celebrates 10 Years of “The IJ Way” 3 IJ Takes on Eminent Domain Abuse In Connecticut 6 With the Institute for Justice’s help, Carol Thomas won her car back after it was unconstitutionally taken from her. She is now continuing her legal challenge to end the government’s abuse of civil asset forfeiture. By Scott Bullock Court Judge G. Thomas Bowen, reading from the Carol Thomas—a former Cumberland County bench, dismissed the government’s claim against her New Assistant Director deputy sheriff whose own car was seized when her car, and ordered both the title to her car and a Joins IJ Clinic son was caught in a marijuana bust—has her car and $1,500 bond she posted to be returned to her. But her cash back, but she is not ready to give up her just as important, the judge allowed a counterclaim fight to overturn New Jersey’s unconstitutional civil for- filed by Thomas and the Institute for Justice challeng- 10 feiture laws. The Institute represented Thomas (and ing the state’s civil forfeiture law to continue in court. her car) not only in her successful effort to reclaim Judge Bowen found that even though Thomas’ case is ownership of her car but also to challenge what drives over, it is in the public interest to decide whether or civil forfeiture abuse in New Jersey and in many other not New Jersey’s perverse incentive structure violates states: the direct profit incentive underlying the laws, the Due Process Clause of the Constitution, especially Published Bimonthly by the whereby police and prosecutors are entitled to keep since the government has not changed its policy of Institute for Justice the cash and property they seize. distributing forfeited property to the very agencies On January 19 of this year, the Institute secured charged with enforcing the law. visit us online: an early-round victory in Thomas’ case when Superior www.ij.org Forfeiture continued on page 5 Illinois Appellate Court Upholds Constitutionality of Choice By Matthew Berry Rather, the tax credit allows Illinois par- In a significant victory for Illinois families ents to keep more of their own money as well as for school choice supporters nation- to spend on the education of their chil- wide, the Appellate Court of Illinois for the dren as they see fit. Fourth Judicial District in a decision issued on The court went on to say, howev- February 8 unanimously upheld the constitu- er, that the tax credit would still be tionality of the Illinois educational expenses tax constitutional even if one considered credit law. The ruling was handed down the money claimed through the credit Excerpt from approximately three months after oral argument to constitute public funds. This is “Presidential Update” was held in Springfield, Illinois. At that argu- because the tax credit is fully consis- Cleveland Teachers ment, IJ defended the constitutionality of the tent with both U.S. Supreme Court Union Newsletter credit on behalf of 12 Illinois families. and Illinois Supreme Court precedents Because of this decision, when IJ’s clients indicating that programs providing gen- “. I got an interesting note from and other Illinois taxpayers file their tax returns eral educational assistance are consti- one of our elementary teachers this spring, they will be sending less money to tutional so long as religious and nonre- along the lines of, "Why are you the government, which will enable them to ligious options are treated equally and wasting your time with vouchers spend more money on their children’s educa- funds are guided by the private and and charter schools instead of tion. The February ruling of the three-judge independent choices of parents. important issues like how unpre- panel was the third decision by an Illinois court IJ also represents Illinois families pared the students are to learn and affirming the constitutionality of the tax credit in in a separate case challenging the other more pressing issues like less than two years; two Illinois trial courts had constitutionality of the tax credit. Oral inclusion and lack of supplies." already dismissed challenges to the credit filed argument was held before the My answer was . vouchers and by the Illinois Education Association, Illinois Appellate Court of Illinois for the Fifth charter schools are like cancer: Judicial they are silent killers of your The tax credit allows Illinois parents to keep more District in career and public education in of their own money to spend on the education of Mount general. They are not going to go their children as they see fit. Vernon, away by themselves, they have to Illinois, be made to go away, and you Federation of Teachers and other special-inter- earlier this year, and we expect a deci- don't have the time to do that. I est organizations opposed to education reform. sion in that case to be released by the do (I make the time), and that's is The teachers’ unions and their allies argue middle of the summer. [sic] what you pay me to do. .” that the law, which provides a credit against Although the teachers’ unions will state income taxes for 25 percent of tuition, undoubtedly appeal their recent defeat book fees or lab fees incurred by K-12 students to the Illinois Supreme Court, five at public or private schools up to a maximum of judges have now looked at the educa- $500 per family, violates four provisions of the tional expenses tax credit, and all five Illinois Constitution, two of which deal with have concluded that it’s constitutional. establishment of religion. The appellate court, That record of success makes us however, emphatically rejected these argu- hopeful about our prospects in our ments. remaining battles defending the consti- The opinion written by Justice Rita Garman tutionality of the credit.N was a complete victory for school choice sup- porters. The court ruled that the tax credit Matthew Berry is an Institute for Justice attorney. does not violate the Illinois Constitution because no public money is spent at religious schools. 2 March 2001 Board Chairman Dave Kennedy On IJ’s 10th Anniversary Bolick wanted to make to start a new non-lawyers. They belong to the kind of public interest law firm. The organization not for any specific year was 1986, and knowing Chip expertise they may bring, but rather, and Clint, I looked forward to hearing for their fundamental commitment to what they had to say. Not surprising- the mission of the Institute—securing ly, they brought passion, vision and the rule of law essential to a society intellect to the proposal. However, I of free and responsible individuals. had to give them my candid advice This Board is a marvelous collection when they asked, and that was that of deeply committed individuals who they were not quite yet seasoned give freely and much more than gen- enough to pull off the ambitious erously of their time, their energies agenda they had in mind. That set and their personal resources. the two of them off to develop the Added to that kind of commit- strategic litigation blueprints, fundrais- ment at the Board level, is a staff—a IJ Chairman of the Board Dave Kennedy personifies IJ’s ing talents, management acumen team—of individuals who, at their rela- commitment to principle and tireless devotion to action and other skills they brought together tively very young age, would make and results. when they finally launched the any idealist proud. They share com- By Dave Kennedy Institute for Justice ten years ago. pletely the Board’s commitment and The experience since then has been, devotion to principle. They work long It’s hard to believe it was more for me at least, a dream come true. hours, tirelessly and always without than 20 years ago when I first met Since the Institute began, it has complaint, to further the cause of indi- Chip Mellor, and Clint Bolick only the been characterized by a steadfast vidual liberty, and to vindicate the year following. We all lived out West commitment to principle and at the rights of our clients. All of this they do and became involved with a regional same time by a tireless devotion to in a very special way, which we have public interest law firm based in action and results. As anyone who all come to call simply “The IJ Way.” Denver, Colorado. Each of us felt has started a business in either the You just have to understand passionately about the overarching, profit or non-profit world knows, the how incredibly inspiring it is for all of coercive arm of government and its start-up phase is a make-or-break us to be affiliated with such an enter- intrusion into the daily lives of not just time of great intensity. That was cer- prise! each of us, but into the lives of plain, tainly true at the Institute for Justice. As we look ahead, the future of ordinary people everywhere. We tried I remember fondly, and with some IJ has never looked brighter. We to do something about intrusive gov- amazement, those early days when know there will always be challenges, ernmental action—about unaccount- we were confronting the challenge of but with the strength and integrity this able bureaucrats presuming to force actually creating an organization that organization has demonstrated over “solutions” and programs on others would leave its mark on constitutional the years, we will turn those chal- because those bureaucrats “knew jurisprudence.