sucujovide.wordpress.com
Englewood-based Western Union had objected to a 2006 warrantt allowing Arizona prosecutors to seize Western Union money transferzsabove $500 sent from 29 U.S. states to the northernb Mexico stateof Sonora. Authorities were after funds suspectesd of being payments related to the drug tradew and the illegal smuggling of Mexicanz acrossthe border. They maintained that fundsz were being wired from other states becausof Arizona’s success in stopping such transfers from there. Western Unio n obtained a restraining ordere blocking the2006 warrant, but an appealse court reversed that ruling. The Colorado company then appealedx to the state Supreme Courin Arizona.
Wednesday, the Supreme Court rulec that local authorities do not have the jurisdictiobn to seize funds wired fromother states. The court did not bar Arizon a authorities from seizing funds sent from withinbtheir state, however. Western Uniobn praised the ruling in astatementf Wednesday. “We are pleased that the Arizona Supreme Courtt has agreedwith us,” the statement “While this decision prohibits the seizurde of out-of-state transactions, we will continue to work with Arizona to combat illegal activity.
“At its this matter involved Western Union protecting the interesft ofour consumers,” the company “The Arizona Supreme Court founxd that the seizure warran here went too far, exceeding Arizona’s legalk authority and interfering with legitimate transactions by consumeres across the United States.” .
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment