WASHINGTON, D.C. — Attorney General Jeff Sessions said yesterday that the U.S. Department of Justice will make it easier to engage in Civil Asset Forfeiture — a practice whereby local law enforcement agencies can seize property from those suspected of a crime, and then sell that property for a profit.
Specifically, Sessions said the practice will increase in drug-related cases.
“With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures. No criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime,” the Attorney General said at a law enforcement conference in Minnesota.
Civil Asset Forfeiture does not require that a person be convicted — or even charged — of a crime for law enforcement to confiscate their property. The guidelines laid out by Sessions’ Justice Department merely require that someone be suspected of criminal wrongdoing. The law then allows agencies to turn around and sell the confiscated property to pay for expenses.
Several prominent Conservative, libertarian, and liberal groups oppose the practice on constitutional grounds. The concern arises under the Due Process Clauses contained within the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendmendments, which state “No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
In a dissenting opinion in the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent refusal to hear a Civil Asset Forfeiture case out of Texas, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas questioned “whether modern civil-forfeiture statutes can be squared with the Due Process Clause and our Nation’s history.” He continued:
This system — where police can seize property with limited judicial oversight and retain it for their own use — has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses…
These forfeiture operations frequently target the poor and other groups least able to defend their interests in forfeiture proceedings. Perversely, these same groups are often the most burdened by forfeiture. They are more likely to use cash than alternative forms of payment, like credit cards, which may be less susceptible to forfeiture. And they are more likely to suffer in their daily lives while they litigate for the return of a critical item of property, such as a car or a home.
Police frequently seize cash during CAF because most drug operations are run under the table. At the event, Sessions described the practice as “appropriate, as is sharing with our partners,” to which the crowd responded with thunderous applause.
Despite the constitutional and practical criticisms, Sessions and other Attorneys General maintain that CAF is a critical function of law enforcement. “It’s a great way to build teamwork by adopting the cases and sharing the money,” Stefan Cassella, a former federal prosecutor, told Fox News.
According to a report from the Institue of Justice, Alabama’s Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws are amongst the most liberal in the nation and give police heavy leeway in exercising their authority. In order to seize a person’s property in Alabama, police must meet the lower threshold of “probable cause,” rather than “preponderance of the evidence” or “clear and convincing evidence.”
