Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2015/02/23 22:30:04
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
I'll ask again, is there any reason why people believe that this judgement is unenforceable? The PLO have assets in the United States, and receive funding from the United States. It is a readly enforceable judgement on its face
Because enfocing it means siezing assets of the PLO, which will honk them off, which will make any negotiations with them more difficult, which will make a peace agreement between them and Israel even harder to achieve (if it's even possible in the first place) so the State Department will do what it can to prevent actual money from changing hands.
Emperor's Eagles (undergoing Chapter reorganization)
Caledonian 95th (undergoing regimental reorganization)
Thousands Sons (undergoing Warband re--- wait, are any of my 40K armies playable?)
2015/02/23 22:33:39
Subject: Re:Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
whembly wrote: Didn't the 9/11 victims successfully sue the Saudis/Taliban/??
I don't think so. They got permission to sue them (the courts initially debated if they should be allowed to sue Saudi Arabia). But seriously. Real world now. You really think they'll get anything? They won't. The most they'll ever get is a symbolic judgement, and I doubt they'll even get that since they're trying to sue a state for the actions of individuals not directly connected to the state.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/23 22:34:59
LordofHats wrote: Seizing assets owned by a foreign body is a foreign policy decision. The court can order the seizure but the executive can refuse to enforce the order (and I suspect will).
Do you have a link that shows that the State Department, the executive branch, or the legislative branch will be enforcing this judgement rather than the judicial branch?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LordofHats wrote: How is the seize of assets belonging to the PNA not a foreign policy issue?
Because it is a judgement rendered by the judicial branch. It is a private matter between two parties.
Should one party attempt to make it a political matter that does not change the fact that this was never on its face anything other than a civil lawsuit for damages.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
squidhills wrote: Because enfocing it means siezing assets of the PLO, which will honk them off, which will make any negotiations with them more difficult, which will make a peace agreement between them and Israel even harder to achieve (if it's even possible in the first place) so the State Department will do what it can to prevent actual money from changing hands.
How will this decision, stemming from a civil suit between US citizens and the PLO, make peace between Israel and the Palestinians more difficult?
Is this a more important issue than settlements?
Is this more important than access to religiously significant sites?
Is this more important than agreement over security concerns?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/23 22:44:02
2015/02/23 22:46:47
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
Dreadclaw69 wrote: or the legislative branch will be enforcing this judgement rather than the judicial branch?
Because the court orders asset forfeiture. They don't have the legal authority to actually seize assets which is the only way that money will ever be paid out. EDIT: To expand, actually seizing these assets would fall on the Treasury Department
Because it is a judgement rendered by the judicial branch. It is a private matter between two parties.
That's just childishly naive.
Should one party attempt to make it a political matter that does not change the fact that this was never on its face anything other than a civil lawsuit for damages.
For those filing suit yeah, but the US government has to actually enforce the ruling, and anything the US government does concerning foreign assets is a foreign policy issue. There's no way not to get this other than to willingly refuse to understand it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/23 22:50:02
How will this decision, stemming from a civil suit between US citizens and the PLO, make peace between Israel and the Palestinians more difficult?
Is this a more important issue than settlements?
Is this more important than access to religiously significant sites?
Is this more important than agreement over security concerns?
Because people in that part of the world (on both sides) will take any opportunity to find something new to hate each other for. Is it more important than any of those things? To you and me, of course it isn't. To the people involved in hating each other as hard aas they can, everything is of the utmost importance, if it lets you hate the other guy more righteously.
Emperor's Eagles (undergoing Chapter reorganization)
Caledonian 95th (undergoing regimental reorganization)
Thousands Sons (undergoing Warband re--- wait, are any of my 40K armies playable?)
2015/02/23 23:07:44
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Because it is a judgement rendered by the judicial branch. It is a private matter between two parties
I think that Lord already answered this, and probably better, butthe simple answer is that the judiciary has no ability to enforce judgements in and of itself, either on foreign or domestic matters. Any garnishments are done by a third party: the branch that is charged with actually enforcing the laws, which is why a Sheriff's department actually executes court-ordered evictions in the US (for example).
In this case these executive may decide that it's not politically in the interests of the US to collect this judgement.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/23 23:08:23
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2015/02/23 23:31:26
Subject: Re:Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
So the argument is that if you fund a charity and then the charity allegedly funds terrorism then you are liable.
I wonder if that will be applied to NORAID, or the numerous charities that financially support Zionist expansion.
I wont hold my breath.
Also as started later in the article this will be blocked at another level.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
2015/02/24 10:09:14
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
LordofHats wrote: Because the court orders asset forfeiture. They don't have the legal authority to actually seize assets which is the only way that money will ever be paid out. EDIT: To expand, actually seizing these assets would fall on the Treasury Department
New York City Civil Court
. . .
Enforcement Officers
There are two kinds of enforcement officers: A Sheriff, who is a City of New York employee, and a City Marshal, who is not employed by the city but rather works independently. There is a deputy sheriff in each county, and there are many marshals. You can click on List of Marshals to obtain a list of New York City Marshals’ names and contact information, or you can get a list of marshals from the clerk. You should contact an enforcement officer in the county where the judgment debtor has property. If you do not know where the judgment debtor has property, then contact an enforcement officer in the county where the judgment debtor resides.
When you contact an enforcement officer, ask him or her to request an ‘execution’ from the court. The execution allows the officer to seize a judgment debtor’s property or money. Before the officer can ask the court for an execution he or she must know what assets the judgment debtor has and where they can be found. It is your responsibility to provide this information. The enforcement officer will not look for the judgment debtor’s assets without your assistance.
You will have to pay certain fees for the enforcement officer’s services. For example, you must pay the enforcement officer’s milage fee in advance for a property execution, or up to $50.00 in advance for an income execution.
Sometimes these fees can be added to the amount of the judgment and will be paid by the judgment debtor. Also, if you reach a settlement with the judgment debtor after you hire an enforcement officer, you will not recover the fees already paid, and will be responsible to the enforcement officer for 5% of the settlement amount. This is true even if you negotiate the settlement without any assistance from the enforcement officer.
Mission
Maintain a strong economy and create economic and job opportunities by promoting the conditions that enable economic growth and stability at home and abroad, strengthen national security by combating threats and protecting the integrity of the financial system, and manage the U.S. Government’s finances and resources effectively.
Treasury's mission highlights its role as the steward of U.S. economic and financial systems, and as an influential participant in the world economy.
The Treasury Department is the executive agency responsible for promoting economic prosperity and ensuring the financial security of the United States. The Department is responsible for a wide range of activities such as advising the President on economic and financial issues, encouraging sustainable economic growth, and fostering improved governance in financial institutions. The Department of the Treasury operates and maintains systems that are critical to the nation's financial infrastructure, such as the production of coin and currency, the disbursement of payments to the American public, revenue collection, and the borrowing of funds necessary to run the federal government. The Department works with other federal agencies, foreign governments, and international financial institutions to encourage global economic growth, raise standards of living, and to the extent possible, predict and prevent economic and financial crises. The Treasury Department also performs a critical and far-reaching role in enhancing national security by implementing economic sanctions against foreign threats to the U.S., identifying and targeting the financial support networks of national security threats, and improving the safeguards of our financial systems.
Civil Court Judgments
The Sheriff's Office can attempt to collect outstanding NYC Civil Court Judgments on your behalf. You may bring or mail your judgment to us and we will attempt to satisfy the amount of the judgment plus interest and any fees. The fee for this is $45.00.
A NYC Civil Court Judgment is not valid for seizing Real Property (land, houses, etc...) unless it is docketed in the Supreme Court in the county where Civil Court is located. A transcript of the judgment must then be docketed to the Supreme Court where the property to be seized is located. What you need to bring/send us:
Copy of the Judgment
Completed Request for an Execution
Completed Affidavit in Support of Execution
Check or Money Order for $45.00 made out to "NYC Sheriff"
Send to Sheriff County Office where Debtor is located
Judgments from Civil, City, or District Courts outside of New York City are not valid in New York City unless docketed in a New York State Supreme Court or County Court.
Supreme Court Judgments
The Sheriff’s Office can attempt to collect personal property by seizing and selling at public auction personal property. This may include real property within the county, bank accounts, money loaned, money due on goods sold and delivered, and rents and royalties. This does not include salary and wages. A property execution must be must be issued by either an attorney, or by the clerk of the court.
If the execution is against real property, judgment must be entered with the clerk of the county where property is located, or a transcript of judgment must be docketed with that clerk. What you need to bring/send us:
Cover letter detailing actions to be taken
Check or Money Order for $45.00 made out to "NYC Sheriff"
Send to Sheriff County Office where debtor, garnishee, or debtor's property is located
I don't see any involvement in the collection of the judgement by the Treasury Department.
It is factually accurate. If you still feel that this is a political judgement perhaps you could explain what criteria, or definition, you have to support your view.
LordofHats wrote: For those filing suit yeah, but the US government has to actually enforce the ruling, and anything the US government does concerning foreign assets is a foreign policy issue. There's no way not to get this other than to willingly refuse to understand it.
I'm still waiting for any sort of evidence that would support your statement
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ouze wrote: I think that Lord already answered this, and probably better, butthe simple answer is that the judiciary has no ability to enforce judgements in and of itself, either on foreign or domestic matters. Any garnishments are done by a third party: the branch that is charged with actually enforcing the laws, which is why a Sheriff's department actually executes court-ordered evictions in the US (for example).
In this case these executive may decide that it's not politically in the interests of the US to collect this judgement.
New York Civil Court link above lists two methods of collecting judgement. Neither involve the Treasury Department. Do you have other evidence that shows the Treasury Department would collect judgement?
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2015/02/24 10:41:26
0014/02/15 13:32:59
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
They're not saying that it's a political judgement, they're saying that the judgement has political ramifications.
Take that US soldier that was arrested for crossing the mexican border with an undeclared gun. The decision to arrest him was not a political decision, it was a "this person has broken a law, therefore he is under arrest" decision. Did the arrest have political ramifications? Most certainly.
A judgement can be made that is entirely independent of politics, but that doesn't mean that it has no political ramifications.
Dreadclaw69 wrote: New York Civil Court link above lists two methods of collecting judgement. Neither involve the Treasury Department. Do you have other evidence that shows the Treasury Department would collect judgement?
Why are you asking me to prove something I never stated?
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2015/02/24 14:16:23
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
Are you really so dense that you think a sheriff is going to enforce a class action lawsuit to hundreds of millions? This isn't some small town court ruling where you're demanding $500 from your neighbor. Carrying out that seizure is going to take freezing assets across the country, i.e. federal involvement, sorting through them, and managing all that money. It is not something that a sheriff or third part enforcer does on their own.
If you still feel that this is a political judgement
Maybe try actually addressing what is posted. This is not. The politics of the judgement itself are irrelevant but the ramifications of carrying that judgement out are.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2015/02/24 14:28:38
Maybe you should mellow out before you have a stroke no?
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2015/02/24 14:27:39
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2015/02/24 15:05:06
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
(a) In General.— There is established in the Treasury of the United States a fund to be known as the “Department of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund” (referred to in this section as the “Fund”). The Fund shall be available to the Secretary, without fiscal year limitation, with respect to seizures and forfeitures made pursuant to any law (other than section 7301 or 7302 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) enforced or administered by the Department of the Treasury or the United States Coast Guard for the following law enforcement purposes:
(1)
(A) Payment of all proper expenses of seizure (including investigative costs incurred by a Department of the Treasury law enforcement organization leading to seizure) or the proceedings of forfeiture and sale, including the expenses of detention, inventory, security, maintenance, advertisement, or disposal of the property, and if condemned by a court and a bond for such costs was not given, the costs as taxed by the court.
(B) Payment for—
(i) contract services;
(ii) the employment of outside contractors to operate and manage properties or to provide other specialized services necessary to dispose of such properties in an effort to maximize the return from such properties; and
(iii) reimbursing any Federal, State, or local agency for any expenditures made to perform the functions described in this subparagraph.
(C) Awards of compensation to informers under section 619 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1619).
(D) Satisfaction of—
(i) liens for freight, charges, and contributions in general average, notice of which has been filed with the appropriate Customs officer according to law; and
(ii) subject to the discretion of the Secretary, other valid liens and mortgages against property that has been forfeited pursuant to any law enforced or administered by a Department of the Treasury law enforcement organization. To determine the validity of any such lien or mortgage, the amount of payment to be made, and to carry out the functions described in this subparagraph, the Secretary may employ and compensate attorneys and other personnel skilled in State real estate law.
(E) Payment of amounts authorized by law with respect to remission and mitigation.
(F) Payment of claims of parties in interest to property disposed of under section 612(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1612 (b)), in the amounts applicable to such claims at the time of seizure.
(G) Equitable sharing payments made to other Federal agencies, State and local law enforcement agencies, and foreign countries pursuant to section 616(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1616a (c)),section 981 of title 18, or subsection (h) of this section, and all costs related thereto.
(H) Payment for services of experts and consultants needed by a Department of the Treasury law enforcement organization to carry out the organization’s duties relating to seizure and forfeiture.
(I) payment [2] of overtime salaries, travel, fuel, training, equipment, and other similar costs of State or local law enforcement officers that are incurred in joint law enforcement operations with a Department of the Treasury law enforcement organization; [3]
(J) payment [2] made pursuant to guidelines promulgated by the Secretary, if such payment is necessary and directly related to seizure and forfeiture program expenses for—
(i) the purchase or lease of automatic data processing systems (not less than a majority of which use will be related to such program);
(ii) training;
(iii) printing; and
(iv) contracting for services directly related to—
(I) the identification of forfeitable assets;
(II) the processing of and accounting for forfeitures; and
(III) the storage, maintenance, protection, and destruction of controlled substances.
(2) At the discretion of the Secretary—
(A) payment of awards for information or assistance leading to a civil or criminal forfeiture involving any Department of the Treasury law enforcement organization participating in the Fund;
(B) purchases of evidence or information by—
(i) a Department of the Treasury law enforcement organization with respect to—
(I) a violation of section 1956 or 1957 of title 18 (relating to money laundering); or
(II) a law, the violation of which may subject property to forfeiture under section 981 or 982 of title 18;
(ii) the United States Customs Service with respect to drug smuggling or a violation of section 542 or 545 of title 18 (relating to fraudulent customs invoices or smuggling);
(iii) the United States Secret Service with respect to a violation of—
(I) section 1028, 1029, or 1030 or [4] title 18;
(II) any law of the United States relating to coins, obligations, or securities of the United States or of a foreign government; or
(III) any law of the United States which the United States Secret Service is authorized to enforce relating to fraud or other criminal or unlawful activity in or against any federally insured financial institution, the Resolution Trust Corporation, or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; and
(iv) the United States Customs Service or the Internal Revenue Service with respect to a violation of chapter 53 of this title (relating to the Bank Secrecy Act).
(C) payment of costs for publicizing awards available under section 619 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1619);
(D) payment for equipment for any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft available for official use by a Department of the Treasury law enforcement organization to enable the vessel, vehicle, or aircraft to assist in law enforcement functions, and for other equipment directly related to seizure or forfeiture, including laboratory equipment, protective equipment, communications equipment, and the operation and maintenance costs of such equipment;
(E) the payment of claims against employees of the Customs Service settled by the Secretary under section 630 of the Tariff Act of 1930;
(F) payment for equipment for any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft available for official use by a State or local law enforcement agency to enable the vessel, vehicle, or aircraft to assist in law enforcement functions if the vessel, vehicle, or aircraft will be used in joint law enforcement operations with a Department of the Treasury law enforcement organization;
(G) reimbursement of private persons for expenses incurred by such persons in cooperating with a Department of the Treasury law enforcement organization in investigations and undercover law enforcement operations; [5]
(H) payment for training foreign law enforcement personnel with respect to seizure or forfeiture activities of the Department of the Treasury; and [6]
The Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Program encompasses the seizure and forfeiture of assets that represent the proceeds of, or were used to facilitate federal crimes. The primary mission of the Program is to employ asset forfeiture powers in a manner that enhances public safety and security. This is accomplished by removing the proceeds of crime and other assets relied upon by criminals and their associates to perpetuate their criminal activity against our society. Asset forfeiture has the power to disrupt or dismantle criminal organizations that would continue to function..
This was a civil case, not a criminal matter. This does not apply to this case either
LordofHats wrote: Are you really so dense that you think a sheriff is going to enforce a class action lawsuit to hundreds of millions? This isn't some small town court ruling where you're demanding $500 from your neighbor. Carrying out that seizure is going to take freezing assets across the country, i.e. federal involvement, sorting through them, and managing all that money. It is not something that a sheriff or third part enforcer does on their own.
So, I am naive, dense, and cannot operate a search engine? Ignoring the obvious forum rules violations I note that you have not provided anything to dispute that the Sheriff or Marshall have jurisdiction in this matter.
LordofHats wrote: Maybe try actually addressing what is posted. This is not. The politics of the judgement itself are irrelevant but the ramifications of carrying that judgement out are.
Merely because a judgement may incidentally have political consequences that does not make it a political judgement, nor a foreign policy issue as you have contended.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ouze wrote: Why are you asking me to prove something I never stated?
It appears there was a mis-quote. My apologies
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/24 15:06:29
2015/02/24 15:09:42
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
Frazzled wrote: Now you have that song in my head. For Shame!
And thus my evil plan is complete
On the off hand I've been looking back into other times this happened (back in 2005 the court founded $118 million against the PLO and actually ordered accounts to be frozen), but as far as I can tell that money has not been paid out in the past 10 years. There are other cases as well, but the 05 cases seems to have been the only one where anything was actually done to try and force payment. of course, they might have been paid and any reports on it are just buried in the web because "frozen assets" makes a better head line than "family gets money"
(1) Money Judgment; Applicable Procedure. A money judgment is enforced by a writ of execution, unless the court directs otherwise. The procedure on execution—and in proceedings supplementary to and in aid of judgment or execution—must accord with the procedure of the state where the court is located, but a federal statute governs to the extent it applies.
(2) Obtaining Discovery. In aid of the judgment or execution, the judgment creditor or a successor in interest whose interest appears of record may obtain discovery from any person—including the judgment debtor—as provided in these rules or by the procedure of the state where the court is located.
(b) Against Certain Public Officers. When a judgment has been entered against a revenue officer in the circumstances stated in 28 U.S.C. §2006, or against an officer of Congress in the circumstances stated in 2 U.S.C. §118, the judgment must be satisfied as those statutes provide.
(a) Property Subject to Execution.— All property in which the judgment debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest shall be subject to levy pursuant to a writ of execution. The debtor’s earnings shall not be subject to execution while in the possession, custody, or control of the debtor’s employer. Co-owned property shall be subject to execution to the extent such property is subject to execution under the law of the State in which it is located.
(b) Creation of Execution Lien.— A lien shall be created in favor of the United States on all property levied on under a writ of execution and shall date from the time of the levy. Such lien shall have priority over all subsequent liens and shall be for the aggregate amount of the judgment, costs, and interest. The execution lien on any real property as to which the United States has a judgment lien shall relate back to the judgment lien date.
(c) Writ of Execution.—
(1) Issuance.— On written application of counsel for the United States, the court may issue a writ of execution. Multiple writs may issue simultaneously, and successive writs may issue before the return date of a writ previously issued.
(2) Form of writ.—
(A) General contents.— A writ of execution shall specify the date that the judgment is entered, the court in which it is entered, the amount of the judgment if for money, the amount of the costs, the amount of interest due, the sum due as of the date the writ is issued, the rate of postjudgment interest, the name of the judgment debtor, and the judgment debtor’s last known address.
(B) Additional contents.—
(i) Except as provided in clauses (ii) and (iii), the writ shall direct the United States marshal to satisfy the judgment by levying on and selling property in which the judgment debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest, but not to exceed property reasonably equivalent in value to the aggregate amount of the judgment, costs, and interest.
(ii) A writ of execution issued on a judgment for the delivery to the United States of the possession of personal property, or for the delivery of the possession of real property, shall particularly describe the property, and shall require the marshal to deliver the possession of the property to the United States.
(iii) A writ of execution on a judgment for the recovery of personal property or its value shall direct the marshal, in case a delivery of the specific property cannot be had, to levy and collect such value out of any property in which the judgment debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest.
(d) Levy of Execution.—
(1) In general.— Levy on property pursuant to a writ of execution issued under this section shall be made in the same manner as levy on property is made pursuant to a writ of attachment issued under section 3102 (d).
(2) Death of judgment debtor.— The death of the judgment debtor after a writ of execution is issued stays the execution proceedings, but any lien acquired by levy of the writ shall be recognized and enforced by the court for the district in which the estate of the deceased is located. The execution lien may be enforced—
(A) against the executor, administrator, or personal representative of the estate of the deceased; or
(B) if there be none, against the deceased’s property coming to the heirs or devisees or at their option against cash in their possession, but only to the extent of the value of the property coming to them.
(3) Records of united states marshal.—
(A) A United States marshal receiving a writ of execution shall endorse thereon the exact hour and date of receipt.
(B) The United States marshal shall make a written record of every levy, specify the property on which levy is made, the date on which levy is made, and the marshal’s costs, expenses, and fees.
(C) The United States marshal shall make a written return to the court on each writ of execution stating concisely what is done pursuant to the writ and shall deliver a copy to counsel for the United States who requests the writ. The writ shall be returned not more than—
(i) 90 days after the date of issuance if levy is not made; or
(ii) 10 days after the date of sale of property on which levy is made.
(e) Appointment of Receiver.— Pending the levy of execution, the court may appoint a receiver to manage property described in such writ if there is a substantial danger that the property will be removed from the jurisdiction of the court, lost, materially injured or damaged, or mismanaged.
(f) Replevy; Redemption.—
(1) Before execution sale.—
(A) Before execution sale, the United States marshal may return property [1] to the judgment debtor any personal property taken in execution, on—
(i) satisfaction of the judgment, interest, and costs, and any costs incurred in connection with scheduling the sale; or
(ii) receipt from the judgment debtor of a bond—
(I) payable to the United States, with 2 or more good and sufficient sureties to be approved by the marshal, conditioned on the delivery of the property to the marshal at the time and place named in the bond to be sold under subsection (g); or
(II) for the payment to the marshal of a fair value thereof which shall be stated in the bond.
(B) A judgment debtor who sells or disposes of property replevied under subparagraph (A) shall pay the United States marshal the stipulated value of such property.
(C) If the judgment debtor fails to deliver such property to the United States marshal pursuant to the terms of the delivery described in subparagraph (A)(ii)(I) and fails to pay the United States marshal the stipulated value of such property, the United States marshal shall endorse the bond “forfeited” and return it to the court from which the writ of execution issued. If the judgment is not fully satisfied, the court shall issue a writ of execution against the judgment debtor and the sureties on the bond for the amount due, not exceeding the stipulated value of the property, on which execution no delivery bond shall be taken, which instruction shall be endorsed on the writ.
(2) After execution sale.— The judgment debtor shall not be entitled to redeem the property after the execution sale.
(g) Execution Sale.—
(1) General procedures.— An execution sale under this section shall be conducted in a commercially reasonable manner—
(A) Sale of real property.—
(i) In general.—
(I) Except as provided in clause (ii), real property, or any interest therein, shall be sold, after the expiration of the 90-day period beginning on the date of levy under subsection (d), for cash at public auction at the courthouse of the county, parish, or city in which the greater part of the property is located or on the premises or some parcel thereof.
(II) The court may order the sale of any real property after the expiration of the 30-day period beginning on the date of levy under subsection (d) if the court determines that such property is likely to perish, waste, be destroyed, or otherwise substantially depreciate in value during the 90-day period beginning on the date of levy.
(III) The time and place of sale of real property, or any interest therein, under execution shall be advertised by the United States marshal, by publication of notice, once a week for at least 3 weeks prior to the sale, in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the county or parish where the property is located. The first publication shall appear not less than 25 days preceding the day of sale. The notice shall contain a statement of the authority by which the sale is to be made, the time of levy, the time and place of sale, and a brief description of the property to be sold, sufficient to identify the property (such as a street address for urban property and the survey identification and location for rural property), but it shall not be necessary for the notice to contain field notes. Such property shall be open for inspection and appraisal, subject to the judgment debtor’s reasonable objections, for a reasonable period before the day of sale.
(IV) The United States marshal shall serve written notice of public sale by personal delivery, or certified or registered mail, to each person whom the marshal has reasonable cause to believe, after a title search is conducted by the United States, has an interest in property under execution, including lienholders, co-owners, and tenants, at least 25 days before the day of sale, to the last known address of each such person.
(ii) Sale of city lots.— If the real property consists of several lots, tracts, or parcels in a city or town, each lot, tract, or parcel shall be offered for sale separately, unless not susceptible to separate sale because of the character of improvements.
(iii) Sale of rural property.— If the real property is not located in a city or town, the judgment debtor may—
(I) divide the property into lots of not less than 50 acres or in such greater or lesser amounts as ordered by the court;
(II) furnish a survey of such prepared by a registered surveyor; and
(III) designate the order in which those lots shall be sold. When a sufficient number of lots are sold to satisfy the amount of the execution and costs of sale, the marshal shall stop the sale.
(B) Sale of personal property.—
(i) Personal property levied on shall be offered for sale on the premises where it is located at the time of levy, at the courthouse of the county, parish or city wherein it is located, or at another location if ordered by the court. Personal property susceptible of being exhibited shall not be sold unless it is present and subject to the view of those attending the sale unless—
(I) the property consists of shares of stock in corporations;
(II) by reason of the nature of the property, it is impractical to exhibit it; or
(III) the debtor’s interest in the property does not include the right to the exclusive possession.
(ii)
(I) Except as provided in subclause (II), personal property, or any interest therein, shall be sold after the expiration of the 30-day period beginning on the date of levy under subsection (d).
(II) The court may order the sale of any personal property before the expiration of such 30-day period if the court determines that such property is likely to perish, waste, be destroyed, or otherwise substantially depreciate in value during such 30-day period.
(iii) Notice of the time and place of the sale of personal property shall be given by the United States marshal by posting notice thereof for not less than 10 days successively immediately before the day of sale at the courthouse of any county, parish, or city, and at the place where the sale is to be made.
(iv) The United States marshal shall serve written notice of public sale by personal delivery, or registered or certified mail at their last known addresses, on the judgment debtor and other persons who the marshal has reasonable cause to believe, after diligent inquiry, have a substantial interest in the property.
(2) Postponement of sale.— The United States marshal may postpone an execution sale from time to time by continuing the required posting or publication of notice until the date to which the sale is postponed, and appending, at the foot of each such notice of a current copy of the following:
“The above sale is postponed until the day of , 19 , at o’clock .M., , United States Marshal for the District of , by , Deputy, dated .”
(3) Sale procedures.—
(A) Bidding requirements.— A bidder at an execution sale of property, may be required by the United States marshal to make a cash deposit of as much as 20 percent of the sale price proposed before the bid is accepted.
(B) Resale of property.— If the terms of the sale are not complied with by the successful bidder, the United States marshal shall proceed to sell the property again on the same day if there is sufficient time. If there is insufficient time, the marshal shall schedule and notice a subsequent sale of the property as provided in paragraphs (1) and (2).
(4) Rights and liabilities of purchasers.—
(A) Transfer of title after sale.—
(i) If property is sold under this subsection and the successful bidder complies with the terms of the sale, the United States marshal shall execute and deliver all documents necessary to transfer to the successful bidder, without warranty, all the rights, titles, interests, and claims of the judgment debtor in the property.
(ii) If the successful bidder dies before execution and delivery of the documents needed to transfer ownership, the United States marshal shall execute and deliver them to the successful bidder’s estate. Such delivery to the estate shall have the same effect as if accomplished during the lifetime of the purchaser.
(B) Purchaser considered innocent purchaser without notice.— The purchaser of property sold under execution shall be deemed to be an innocent purchaser without notice if the purchaser would have been considered an innocent purchaser without notice had the sale been made voluntarily and in person by the judgment debtor.
(C) Liability of successful bidder who fails to comply.— A successful bidder at an execution sale who fails to comply with the terms of the sale shall forfeit to the United States the cash deposit or, at the election of the United States, shall be liable to the United States, on a subsequent sale of the property, for all net losses incurred by the United States as a result of such failure.
(h) Disposition of Proceeds; Further Levy.—
(1) Distribution of sale proceeds.—
(A) The United States marshal shall first deliver to the judgment debtor such amounts to which the judgment debtor is entitled from the sale of partially exempt property.
(B) The United States marshal shall next deduct from the proceeds of an execution sale of property an amount equal to the reasonable expenses incurred in making the levy of execution and in keeping and maintaining the property.
(C) Except as provided in subparagraph (D), the United States marshal shall deliver the balance of the proceeds to the counsel for the United States as soon as practicable.
(D) If more proceeds are received from the execution sale than is necessary to satisfy the executions held by the United States marshal, the marshal shall pay the surplus to the judgment debtor.
(2) Further levy if execution not satisfied.— If the proceeds of the execution sale of the property levied on are insufficient to satisfy the execution, the United States marshal shall proceed on the same writ of execution to levy other property of the judgment debtor.
Writ of Execution
A writ of execution is a process issued by the court directing the U.S. Marshal to enforce and satisfy a judgment for payment of money. (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 69).
Territorial Limits: The writ is normally limited to execution within the state in which the district court is held unless extended by federal statute, rule, or court order.
Issued By: The writ is issued by the Clerk of the U.S. District or Bankruptcy Court under seal of the court.
Served By: The writ is served by the U.S. Marshal or other person, presumably a law enforcement officer, specially appointed by the court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.1(a).
Manner of Service The writ is served according to the instructions contained within the writ and pursuant to state law, which generally governs procedures for levy. The judgment creditor may be required to provide an indemnity bond and an advance deposit to cover the U.S. Marshal's estimated out-of-pocket expenses. The judgment creditor should accompany the U.S. Marshal in executing the writ so that he or she may answer any questions that may arise during execution.
Custody of Seized Property: Generally, the U.S. Marshal will maintain custody of the attached property, under court supervision. Alternatively, the judgment creditor may be named substitute custodian for the U.S. Marshal and maintain direct responsibility for custody of the attached property, either by court order or by written agreement with the U.S. Marshal. If the requesting party has arranged for moving or storage of the property, he or she must provide the U.S. Marshal with written proof that storage fees have been paid and that adequate insurance against loss or damage has been obtained, as evidenced by an insurance certificate. In addition, if the requesting party is named substitute custodian, he or she must provide the U.S. Marshal with a signed statement holding the U.S. Marshal harmless for any damages incurred as a result of the seizure while the property is in his or her custody. The U.S. Marshal is responsible for advertising and selling the seized property.
Till Tap: A till tap consists of the direct seizure of money from the cash register of a particular business by the U.S. Marshal pursuant to a writ of execution. The propriety of executing a till tap depends on applicable state law.
Return: The person effecting service will make proof of service by recording the action taken pursuant to the instructions contained within the writ and by including any answer of attachment and/or inventory. If money is collected, the return must specify how the funds were applied.
2015/02/24 15:44:50
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
Merely because a judgement may incidentally have political consequences that does not make it a political judgement,
No one ever claimed it was a political judgement...
nor a foreign policy issue as you have contended.
And this is still childishly naive (which is an insult against the opinion, not you). If you ever bothered to actually read through links rather than just browse them, you'd have noticed the AFF is empowered to enact civil court orders with other DoJ bodies as they did in 2005 when they froze $1.3 billion in State side PLO assets.
There is also the DoT Foreign Asset Control, which manages payments from foreign assets (apparently, people have successfully sued Iran and Cuba, but not the PLO which is weird to me... cause Cuba?) EDIT: Successful as in actually got money for it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/24 15:55:34
LordofHats wrote: No one ever claimed it was a political judgement...
I really have no idea what happened with my reply, that post you quoted should have been a reply to this;
Goliath wrote: A judgement can be made that is entirely independent of politics, but that doesn't mean that it has no political ramifications.
Even if I accept your claim you still contended that "Seizing assets owned by a foreign body is a foreign policy decision. . . It's a massive foreign policy decision"
Also you did try and inject politics into the judgement rendered in the case;
"How is the seize of assets belonging to the PNA not a foreign policy issue?"
"anything the US government does concerning foreign assets is a foreign policy issue"
LordofHats wrote: And this is still childishly naive (which is an insult against the opinion, not you). If you ever bothered to actually read through links rather than just browse them, you'd have noticed the AFF is empowered to enact civil court orders with other DoJ bodies as they did in 2005 when they froze $1.3 billion in State side PLO assets.
Link please, because their website is very clear; "The Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Program encompasses the seizure and forfeiture of assets that represent the proceeds of, or were used to facilitate federal crimes."
Nothing in the participants section notes involvement outside this remit
http://www.justice.gov/jmd/afp/05participants/index.htm
Spoiler:
The Justice Asset Forfeiture Program includes activity by DOJ components and several components outside the Department. Each component plays an important role in the Program.
Department of Justice Components
Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section of the Criminal Division holds the responsibility of coordination, direction, and general oversight of the Program. AFMLS handles civil and criminal litigation, provides legal support to the U.S. Attorneys' Offices, establishes policy and procedure, coordinates multi-district asset seizures, administers equitable sharing of assets, acts on petitions for remission, coordinates international forfeiture and sharing and develops training seminars for all levels of government.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) enforces the federal laws and regulations relating to alcohol, tobacco, firearms, explosives and arson by working directly and in cooperation with other federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. ATF has the authority to seize and forfeit firearms, ammunition, explosives, alcohol, tobacco, currency, conveyances and certain real property involved in violation of law.
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) implements major investigative strategies against drug networks and cartels. Enforcement operations have resulted in significant seizure and forfeiture activity. A significant portion of DEA cases are adopted from state and local law enforcement agencies.
Federal Bureau of Investigation The FBI investigates a broad range of criminal violations, integrating the use of asset forfeiture into its overall strategy to eliminate targeted criminal enterprises. The FBI has successfully used asset forfeiture in White Collar Crime, Organized Crime, Drug, Violent Crime and Terrorism investigations. See the FBI Investigative Programs Asset Forfeiture Home Page for more information.
United States Marshals Service as the primary custodian of seized property for the Program. USMS manages and disposes of the majority of the property seized for forfeiture. See their Seized Asset Information page and their National Sellers List for more information.
United States Attorneys' Offices (USAOs) are responsible for the prosecution of both criminal and civil actions against property used or acquired during illegal activity.
Asset Forfeiture Management Staff (AFMS): Has responsibility for management of the Assets Forfeiture Fund, the Consolidated Asset Tracking System (CATS), program-wide contracts, oversight of program internal controls and property management, interpretation of the Assets Forfeiture Fund statute, approval of unusual Fund uses, and legislative liaison on matters affecting the financial integrity of the Program.
Components Outside the Department of Justice
There are several organizations outside the Department of Justice who participate in the DOJ Asset Forfeiture Program. This list may change as additional agencies and offices become part of the DOJ program. These agencies participate in Judicial forfeitures only.
United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) makes seizures under their authority to discourage profit-motivated crimes such as mail fraud, money laundering and drug trafficking using the mail.
Food and Drug Administration FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations has made seizures involving health care fraud schemes, counterfeit pharmaceuticals, illegal distribution of adulterated foods, and product tampering.
United States Department of Agriculture, Office of the Inspector General USDA's Office of Inspector General's (OIG) mission is to promote effectiveness and integrity in the delivery of USDA agricultural programs. Forfeiture is integrated as an important law enforcement tool in combating criminal activity affecting USDA programs.
Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security The Bureau of Diplomatic Security investigates passport and visa fraud and integrates asset forfeiture into our strategy to target the profits made by vendors who provide fraudulent documentation or others who utilize fraudulent visas and/or passports to further their criminal enterprises.
Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) is the criminal investigative arm of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense. The mission of DCIS is to protect America’s War fighters by conducting investigations and forfeitures in support of crucial National Defense priorities that include homeland security/terrorism, product substitution, contract fraud, public corruption, computer crimes, and illegal technology transfers. "
The AFF only concerns funds that were seized under the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984. That has absolutely no bearing on this case. This case was a civil matter, not a criminal matter.
The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 established the Department of Justice Assets Forfeiture Fund to receive the proceeds of forfeiture and to pay the costs associated with such forfeitures, including the costs of managing and disposing of property, satisfying valid liens, mortgages, and other innocent owner claims, and costs associated with accomplishing the legal forfeiture of the property.
LordofHats wrote: There is also the DoT Foreign Asset Control, which manages payments from foreign assets (apparently, people have successfully sued Iran and Cuba, but not the PLO which is weird to me... cause Cuba?) EDIT: Successful as in actually got money for it.
http://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/offices/Pages/Office-of-Foreign-Assets-Control.aspx "The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the US Department of the Treasury administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on US foreign policy and national security goals against targeted foreign countries and regimes, terrorists, international narcotics traffickers, those engaged in activities related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and other threats to the national security, foreign policy or economy of the United States. OFAC acts under Presidential national emergency powers, as well as authority granted by specific legislation, to impose controls on transactions and freeze assets under US jurisdiction. Many of the sanctions are based on United Nations and other international mandates, are multilateral in scope, and involve close cooperation with allied governments."
Your own evidence again does you a dis-service. The FAC concerns sanctions. Sanctions played no part in the ruling of the judgement against the PLO
2015/02/24 23:26:56
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
LordofHats wrote: No you would just prefer to argue a straw man than what is actually posted.
So you did not make those statements I directly quoted you from when you tried to claim this was going to affect foreign policy?
Or was by proving your assertions wrong the strawman of which you complain?
So you did not make those statements I directly quoted you from when you tried to claim this was going to affect foreign policy?
Because it does. If you want to talk about that, we can do that, but you'd have to drop the baffling "political judgement" straw man cause no one once in this thread has said the judgement is political, only the enforcement of said judgement (and in this sense, yeah, the enforcement of pretty much any judgement is a political question which is why the executive carries out enforcement not the judicial). Those two things are not the same.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/25 00:13:30
LordofHats wrote: Because it does. If you want to talk about that, we can do that, but you'd have to drop the baffling "political judgement" straw man cause no one once in this thread has said the judgement is political, only the enforcement of said judgement (and in this sense, yeah, the enforcement of pretty much any judgement is a political question which is why the executive carries out enforcement not the judicial). Those two things are not the same.
I'm still waiting for you to substantiate this statement.
2015/02/25 00:59:05
Subject: Palestinian groups face $218m Israel terror fine in US
That tangent aside, every power either you or I have listed is an executive body (honestly kind makes the whole argument something of a waste of time but w/e).
And this is a political question how? The simple fact of the matter is that private individuals were successful in their claim for civil relief. Any political aspect should not be taken into account.
Emperor's Eagles (undergoing Chapter reorganization)
Caledonian 95th (undergoing regimental reorganization)
Thousands Sons (undergoing Warband re--- wait, are any of my 40K armies playable?) 
