New Hope for Civil Forfeiture Reform

A bipartisan bill in the Senate offers the opportunity for some improvement on the criminal justice front.

By
22

Sweeping police reform is stalled in Congress: The House passed a bill last week that the Senate appears to have no plans to take up, while Sen. Tim Scott’s JUSTICE Act failed to get enough votes to advance to debate. But, a bipartisan group of senators is still pushing for incremental reform. Amid growing concerns over racial inequality in the criminal justice system, “civil asset forfeiture” is facing renewed scrutiny.

On June 25, Sens. Rand Paul, Angus King, Mike Crapo, and Mike Lee reintroduced their bill, the “Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act,” to limit civil asset forfeiture and restore due process rights. 

Through civil asset forfeiture, federal and state-level law enforcement can seize private property they merely suspect is related to some criminal activity. Examples of seized property include cash, vehicles, and even homes. No charges or convictions are required for police to confiscate this property. (Alternatively, in the less-common process of criminal asset forfeiture, a conviction is required.) In an inversion of the principle of “innocent until proven guilty,” Americans must pursue a lengthy, complicated, and costly appeal process to get their property back. 

According to the public interest law firm the Institute for Justice (IJ), the Department of Justice takes in roughly $4.5 billion annually from civil asset forfeiture. And it happens at the state level in most of the country as well. Texas, for example, took in $50 million in 2017 through criminal and civil asset forfeiture combined. IJ examined the fairness of civil asset forfeiture laws to grade all 50 states and gave 35 a “D+” or worse.

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
22
By
Comments (22)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Tracie

    "...in 1984, Congress created the profit motive with changes to and expansions of the forfeiture system that allowed some of the funding to go back to police departments. Perhaps unsurprisingly, IJ finds that “the use of forfeiture at the federal and state levels exploded once profit incentives kicked in.”

    Thank you for that history. I note there are no - to my knowledge - cinematic portrayals of civil forfeiture in the prior (20th) century. Maybe it's been portrayed on TV, probably in a cop-friendly light.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    BrettH

    Nice piece, I’ve always had a gripe against civil asset forfeiture. I’ll be keeping an eye out for how this piece of legislation unfolds. Well done!

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Adam Bridge

    This has always seemed utterly wrong to me. Stopping it now seems like a perfect time. Unless we get distracted. Oh - look over THERE! (bill vanishes)

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Dave Conant - MO

    Is there really no House analog for S 4074? I can't find anything on the internet other than HR 1219 and that's not really as far reaching. Hard to believe that Tom Massie or even Tulsi Gabbard or Will Hurd as parting gestures haven't offered something.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Great piece. It is soooo important to highlight areas where ideology can be set aside for reforms. Such reforms aren’t enough on their own, but they can build a little trust and promote further progress. I’ve always been puzzled that left won’t also accept going after illegal gun possession, a gun control measure the right would support and which would save lives, especially in minority neighborhoods...but ideology seems to block that. Thanks.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Tracie

      Also this notion that one must "Back the Blue" uncritically without noting the systemic changes in policing, like policing for profit.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Rick Harlan

        I don't see how you can "Back the Blue" but also support things like CAF that dishonor their oath and mission.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Tracie

          If you're an amygdala-driven tribal loyalist, it's easy.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Rick Harlan

            Dang it! I forget that one every time!

            Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    CynthiaW

    Good article. The questions I had regarding the basis for Federal (as opposed to state/local) legislation were clearly answered. I love it when an article answers the questions it raises!

    (Yeah, I'm giving you the stink-eye, Wall Street Journal! If The Dispatch had a daily crossword puzzle ... )

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Tele

    Looking back, Miami Vice’s image of heavily armed drug dealers driving expensive cars helped militarize the police and promote civil forfeiture. I remember seeing DARE cars “taken from your local drug dealer,” and they were always Corvettes or Z28’s. I’d bet the majority of repossessed cars were more modest and eventually auctioned off to one of those “buy here-pay here” car lots.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      CynthiaW

      Back in the mid-80s, my father rented a house in Yorktown, VA, that had been seized from a drug dealer. Among other features, it had a 25-yard *indoor* swimming pool.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        DougCLE

        ... with a body buried under it.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          CynthiaW

          Probably. I was a big "Miami Vice" fan - it premiered my freshman year of college - so I thought it was super cool. Also swimming laps in December with snow on the ground.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            BWG

            Wow, a youngster - Sept '84 was my 2nd year of grad school! At the time I liked it too - "MTV cops". Interesting that the creator, Yerkovich, claims it was the other way around - the concept came to him after hearing about the asset forfeiture laws.
            I wonder if the law enforcement org that seized the house your Dad rented was collecting all or part of the rent?

            Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Probably Wrong

        If that were a typical home amenity among drug dealers, you probably wouldn’t remember it as unusual.

        I wish that I had a 25 yard indoor swimming pool in this time of pandemic.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          CynthiaW

          In Florida, Southern California, and other "Miami Vice"-type locales, an outdoor pool would work just fine.

          Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Kaitlin Johnson

    Reading this I found myself thinking about the “stationary bandit” that is government that Jonah talks about. When the profit motive and a monopoly on the use of force collide, results aren’t great.

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    DougCLE

    Finally. I have seen this unjustifiable practice called out again and again, for years, but AFAIK, Congress has ever taken it up in a serious way. I don’t know why that is, but I do hope TD (and others) will stay on this and ask hard questions of any legislator who stands in its way.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Victor Clairmont

      This is a problem I had long wondered about. Happy to see it being addressed here.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Probably Wrong

      As far as I can tell, most politicians didn’t want to get crosswise of the “Senator X wants to make sure that DRUG DEALERS can KEEP their MONEY. In a world like ours, can you AFFORD to vote for someone like Senator X?”

      As much as I want to believe that it’s all the corrupt motives of powerful people this all started as a response to political incentives and a voting public that is only fairly recently becoming savvy enough to push back on this practice.

      Collapse