Report: Government Seizes Billions in Private Property, but Citizens Have Little Recourse
Every year, federal, state, and local government agents take and permanently keep, collectively, billions of dollars of Americans’ property through a practice called civil forfeiture, which allows police officers to seize property (including cash) based on law enforcement believing there is probable cause the property is related to crime. Prosecutors then can shift the ownership of the property to the government through litigation in civil court, even if the property owner never faced criminal conviction or even criminal charges.
A new report from CEI attorney Dan Greenberg argues that reform is urgently needed but impeded by myths fomented by beneficiaries of asset forfeiture to undermine reform.
“The American system of seizure and forfeiture is profoundly unjust, trampling the rights of countless people and denying them access to the courts,” said Greenberg. “Policymakers should prioritize reforming asset forfeiture.”
In the report, Greenberg sets the record straight on five myths peddled by forfeiture beneficiaries:
Cash seizures typically do not consist of hundreds of thousands of dollars – more like several hundred dollars to a little over $1,000.
When property is seized, the owner typically does not have access to the courts to recover it. It’s not worth it to pay thousands to a lawyer to gain back several hundred dollars.
Seizure and forfeiture are not controlled by due process of law. Instead, there is slim likelihood of recovery, a low standard of proof that empowers law enforcement over civilians, and powerful government revenue incentives at work that stack the deck.
Our justice system does not require high standards of proof of wrongdoing for seizures and forfeitures to occur. In fact, they regularly occur without any such evidence.
The injustices caused by civil forfeiture have not been fixed, as some reformers hoped, when states require a conviction in criminal court as a prerequisite to forfeiture litigation in civil court. Why? Because there is often no connection between the crime and the property owner.
The report urges legislators to make specific reforms, like establishing a criminal forfeiture system, requiring that forfeited assets go to a state’s general fund rather than supplement the budgets of police agencies and prosecutors’ offices, and requiring greater transparency in seizure and forfeiture processes so that citizens and policymakers can know the scope of the problem.
Related:
End Civil Asset Forfeiture | Tackling Data Center Water Conservation | The Role of Probable Cause in Forfeiture Cases | Life, Liberty, and Property: Civil Forfeiture in New Hampshire with John Stossel | Civil Asset Forfeiture Still Abused by Florida Law Enforcement | Here’s what happens to Russian oligarch yachts after they’re seized | Data Center SLA Essentials: Crafting Bulletproof Agreements | This Week’s Civil Forfeiture Outrage (Eleventh in a Series: Highway Robbery in California) | Tax Incentives for Data Centers: Legal and Financial Insights | U.S. seeks to seize 280 cryptocurrency accounts tied to North Korean hacks | Disaster Recovery & Business Continuity Planning for Mission-Critical Data Centers | Motion to Set Aside a Declaration of Forfeiture | JLF’s Jon Guze Discusses N.C. Civil Asset Forfeiture and Equitable Sharing | Politician Victim of Civil Asset Forfeiture | Civil Asset Forfeiture Part 1 | Carbon-Neutral Data Centers: Contracting Renewable Energy and Tracking Emissions | Sen. Lee Questions ATF Nominee on Civil Asset Forfeiture | Data Center Leasing & Co-location Agreements: Legal Nuances for Space & Services | International Data Center Law: Cross-Border Operations & Jurisdictional Challenges | Why Quick Action Is Critical in Forfeiture Defense | Unlocking the “Stargate” Initiative: How Imperial Data Center Can Power America’s AI Future | Final Administrative Action by Customs and Border Protection | The Dangers of Accepting Forfeiture Settlements Too Soon | Why Asset Forfeiture Cases Are Different From Criminal Defense
You might also like:
The Role of Probable Cause in Forfeiture Cases | The Debate over Civil Asset Forfeiture | A look into DHS asset forfeiture procedures | Small Heroin Sale Tees Up High Court Test of Forfeiture Laws | The FBI Seized Almost $1 Million From This Family—and Never Charged Them With a Crime | How Asset Forfeiture Drives the Police State | Ninth Circuit: Government Cannot Seize Cash Based Solely on Money’s Intended Use | Civil Forfeiture and Its Impact on California Businesses | Professional RICO Forfeiture Defense Legal Services | Pot Cos. Say California City Reneged On Fee Waiver Promise | Alabama Shows How Law Enforcement Can Get Behind Asset Forfeiture Reform | The Heat: US Civil Asset Forfeiture Controversy Part 2 | The Relationship Between Asset Forfeiture and Policing: A Critical Examination | After FBI seizure of safe deposit boxes in Beverly Hills, legal challenges mount | District Attorneys and Civil Asset Forfeiture | News Paper Articles on Civil Asset Forfeiture Abuses | Over $455,000 Seized from Medical Marijuana Patient Slapped with Civil Asset Forfeiture | This Week’s Civil Forfeiture Outrage (Twelfth in a Series: Love Field Update) | Civil Forfeiture – The Innocent Owner | Over $455,000 Seized from Medical Marijuana Patient Slapped with Civil Asset Forfeiture | Michigan Enacts Civil Asset Forfeiture Reforms | Countering Civil Forfeiture Myths with Facts | Scathing Report Reveals ICE Directive Encouraging Agents to Seize Property for Financial Gain | Critics of Civil Forfeiture Call for Reforms
