[darkcha0s]

Whether that punishment is jail time or a fine is secondary. The primary question is, should the decedents be punished for a crime they did not commit?

Moreover, where do you draw the line? Should all the decedents of german families who got their wealth off the back of slave labor by jews also be forced to forfeit their wealth? What about the decedents of families of plantation owners? How do you go about handling that with the institutions provided? What would they be charged with?

[CJefferson]

Honestly, I'd prefer we, as a society, did tend more in this direction. Where I live (Scotland), most of the country is owned by a small number of families, who inherited it themselves. I'd be happy with a model where this land was, possibly over generations, taken away and redisturbed in some way.

[jacobush]

In the US there are plenty of "US vs $1000" cases already.

[vladTheInhaler]

Though I generally agree with the sentiment that we should do more to claw back ill-gotten gains, civil asset forfeiture is a terrible precedent and should be eliminated, not expanded. The legal theory is that your money (and property) doesn't have the right to due process, since it's not a person. So basically you have to prove that it wasn't involved in a crime. Which just leads to police officers stealing from poor people who haven't been convicted of a crime.

[jacobush]

Exactly.