What is the ruling on purchasing an item when the buyer knows that the seller acquired it through illicit means such as usury or gambling? Is this a matter of dispute or consensus?

There are disagreements among scholars regarding the issue of selling something that was purchased with ill-gotten money. Some scholars deem it permissible, and their argument is that the illicit nature has become attached to the earner's liability, not to the money itself. Others hold that what is acquired through an invalid sale is not owned, and therefore, it is not permissible to dispose of it through selling or gifting. The preponderant opinion is the former, due to the strength of its evidence.