The Oregon Supreme Court ruled that voter-approved restrictions on police powers to seize assets and cash -- and to direct seized assets to drug treatment rather than to law enforcement -- pass constitutional muster, the Oregon Statesman-Journal reported Oct. 20.

In a 4-3 vote, the high court said the measure, approved by voters in 2000, did not violate a constitutional ban on having multiple, unrelated amendments in a single ballot question. The challenge to the law was filed by the Lincoln Interagency Narcotics Team and initially rejected by a county judge, but that ruling was overturned by the Oregon Court of Appeals in 2003.

"Not only do the people wish to be assured that forfeitures are reined in, they shall encourage it by removing the carrot which otherwise would tempt the two political branches of government to treat the criminal law as a revenue-raising source," wrote Oregon Supreme Court Justice Michael Gillette for the majority as the high court overruled the appeals court.

Seizures by Oregon police fell from 1,526 in 2000 to 389 in 2001 after the measure went into effect. The new rules prohibit police from using civil procedures to seize assets unless the property owner is convicted of criminal charges.

The high court's ruling also overrides a 2005 compromise measure, agreed by police and the Oregon chapter of the ACLU, that allows some forfeiture funds to be used for other things besides treatment, such as cleanups of meth labs.