Distracted media missed the asset forfeiture issue
Apparently the President of the United States is now in the business of threatening political careers.
After being told by a Texas sheriff about a state senator who had introduced a bill to require convictions before seizing assets from criminals, the president interjected, “Can you believe that? Who is the state senator? Do you want to give his name? We’ll destroy his career.”
In the new political era of President Trump, this should be not a surprise. Cavalier responses and behaviors are par for the course.
Yet on each occasion that the president pulls a “Donald,” the mainstream media remains inclined to chase after the shiny object — his authoritarian style — rather than focus attention on matters of substance.
Here is what deserves attention in the controversy over asset forfeiture in Texas.
Current law allows police and prosecutors to seize and assume ownership of assets in criminal cases where there is a link — a “nexus” — between a crime and the property. These agencies need not first obtain criminal convictions, nor even file criminal charges. What constitutes a link is also open to broad interpretation.
The primary impetus behind the use of asset forfeiture law is to cripple the capability of drug kingpins and criminal organizations — a very laudable objective.
Yet because the state law is so broadly written, police and prosecutors have unfettered discretion in how the law is applied. Officers readily admit that if there’s little value in the property, they will not file to have it forfeited.
We face a two–fold problem.
First, what about occasions where a law-abiding person’s property is linked to a crime, but the owner had no involvement in the act (i.e., ever loaned your car to someone)? The burden is on the owner to prove that he or she is an “innocent owner.”
Believe that truly innocent owners don’t have their property forfeited? Think again.
A Houston used car salesman, Zaher El-Ali, sold a vehicle on credit to a buyer, but retained title until the vehicle was paid for. The buyer was arrested for drunken driving and cocaine possession, and Mr. El-Ali’s vehicle was forfeited.
He challenged the forfeiture and his case made its way to the Texas Supreme Court, where Al-Eli lost. Most notable is the scathing dissent from Justice Don Willet on behalf of the property owner. Acknowledging that “the government’s burden is slight while the citizen’s burden is significant,” Willett laid out a stern argument that the 21st century version of asset forfeiture oversteps in large measure due to the profit motive of police and prosecutors.
Second, what about cases where a prosecutor does not have enough evidence to earn a criminal conviction or enough evidence to even support filing criminal charges? Under Texas law, because asset forfeiture is a charge against the property and not the person, the owner may still be forced to forfeit the property.
Some lawmakers are rightfully concerned, filing bills in recent legislative sessions to require criminal convictions be obtained before assets are forfeited. Some have also looked to reduce the burden on the innocent owner.
The story here is not the flippant nature of a president asserting his authoritarian style. That’s expected. It can be annoying, but it’s no longer a shock.
Issue number one is the president’s clearly dismissive tone on a question of when the government can seize property from it owners.
Issue number two is that lobbying efforts of law enforcement and prosecutor organizations with a clear profit motive are a major obstacle to reform. It’s akin to allowing the foxes to guard the henhouse.
Related Posts:
Cyber Insurance for Data Centers: Risk Transfer and Coverage Essentials | The IRS has seized $1.2 billion worth of cryptocurrency this fiscal year – here’s what happens to it | Colocation Mergers: Antitrust Laws and Market Competition for Data Centers | Geopolitical Data Regulations: Navigating Data Sovereignty in a Fragmented World | How Civil Forfeiture Helps Cops Steal from You (5-13-16) | Maine Now Requires Criminal Conviction Before Property May Be Forfeited | How Attorneys Challenge Forfeiture Evidence in Court | The Difference Between Administrative and Judicial Forfeiture | Civil Asset Forfeiture “Has Created Serious Problems” | AI News – Civil Forfeiture | Civil Asset Forfeiture: Unfair, Unjust, Un-American | This Week in Civil Forfeiture Outrages | Clarence Thomas vs. Jeff Sessions on Civil Asset Forfeiture | Handling Security Breaches: Legal Action Steps for Data Centers | Civil Asset Forfeiture – the Only Legal Form of Theft | Regulation and Compliance in the AI-Driven Data Center World | Police seized $10,000 of a couple’s cash. They couldn’t get it back — until they went public. | The Justice Department just shut down a huge asset forfeiture program | Latency Management & Geographically Distributed Architectures: Legal and Operational Insights | Our Government Overlords | Judge dismisses case over FBI raid of 1,400 private safe-deposit boxes and seizure of millions in jewelry and cash | Data Center Leasing & Co-location Agreements: Legal Nuances for Space & Services | International Data Residency: Meeting Localization Laws & Minimizing Risks | Supreme Court Could Stop The Federal Government From Not Paying Legal Fees
Related:
Lessons from Landmark Civil Rights Cases | Civil Asset Forfeiture: Undue Process | Asset Forfeiture: A Double Whammy of Bad Policy | U.S. Marshals Service hires custodian to hold crypto seized in criminal activity | Robert Durst to Cops: I Want the $161,000 You Seized | How Can We Stop Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws? | Petition for Remission or Mitigation of the Forfeiture | Forfeiture Case Defense – Rucci Law | House Seizure Attorney Los Angeles – Rucci Law | Seizures of Currency from FedEx or UPS Packages | Seized Cash Attorney California – Rucci Law | Michigan Bans The Cops From Seizing Your Property Without Conviction | FBI gives up attempt to confiscate more than $1 million in California pot-store cash | JLF’s Jon Guze Discusses N.C. Civil Asset Forfeiture and Equitable Sharing | A new twist on asset forfeiture | Asset Seizure Abuse – Rucci Law | Inside Civil Asset Forfeiture | Walberg Introduces the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act | Are law enforcement agencies abusing civil asset forfeiture? | Motion to Suppress in Forfeiture Cases | We Need Transparency and Fairness in Civil Asset Forfeiture | Professional Business Asset Recovery Services Legal Services | A Setback for Justice | Our Government Overlords
