OPINION:
In his recent column, “Using Ukraine war to assault freedom” (Web, April 20), Judge Andrew Napolitano makes dubious use of the Constitution.
Judge Napolitano says the United States may not seize the property of Russian oligarchs without a warrant under the search and seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment or a jury trial under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. But he misses a critical qualifier in the Fourth Amendment.
Contrary to what the judge suggests, the Fourth Amendment does not ban all warrantless searches and seizures, only unreasonable searches and seizures. What the judge characterizes as “emergency exceptions” to warrant requirements are simply examples of reasonable seizures. It’s absurd to suggest a warrantless seizure that’s lawful under the Fourth Amendment requires a jury trial under the Fifth Amendment.
It’s likely that the seizures of oligarch property will be upheld under the federal government’s war and national security powers or on other grounds, but if they are not, it will be because a warrantless seizure was unreasonable, not because of Judge Napolitano’s rigid and erroneous reading of the Fourth and Fifth amendments.
JIM DUEHOLM
Washington
Please read our comment policy before commenting.