Justice Department Shuts Down Huge Asset Forfeiture Program

HughPickens.com writes: Christopher Ingraham reports at the Washington Post that the Department of Justice has announced that it's suspending a controversial asset forfeiture program that allows local police departments to keep a large portion of assets seized from citizens under federal law and funnel it into their own coffers. Asset forfeiture has become an increasingly contentious practice in recent years. It lets police seize and keep cash and property from people who are never convicted — and in many cases, never charged with wrongdoing. Recent reports have found that the use of the practice has exploded in recent years, prompting concern that, in some cases, police are motivated more by profits and less by justice. Criminal justice reformers are cheering the change. "This is a significant deal," says Lee McGrath, legislative counsel at the Institute for Justice. "Local law enforcement responds to incentives. And it's clear that one of the biggest incentives is the relative payout from federal versus state forfeiture. And this announcement by the DOJ changes the playing field for which law state and local [law enforcement] is going to prefer."

Comments

AKA "Stealing from citizens program"

[JoeyRox]

When the government steals they give it a nice sounding euphemism. When citizens steal they're called criminals and go to jail.

Re:AKA "Stealing from citizens program"

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you even bother to read the article where it states that a citizen doesn't even have to be charged with a crime for the feds to take their property? So, if someone hasn't even been charged with a crime how the f**k can you say that the government has a right to take that person's property?

Re:AKA "Stealing from citizens program"

[arth1]

The government's argument are that:
1: It's not them taking it, it's you forfeiting it, and
2: It's not yours until and unless you prove that it was obtained legally, and
3: Because it doesn't belong to you unless you prove it does, and they are under no obligation to find out who it really belongs to, it's their duty to assume ownership.

They're twisting the law with semantics, and shifting the burden of proof over to the accused. Sometimes not even accused, but merely suspected, or affiliated with a suspect.

Re: AKA "Stealing from citizens program"

[ShanghaiBill]

Go read the bill of rights.

If the Bill of Rights actually meant anything, this program would have never been allowed to exist. Even now, it is being suspended by administrative decree, not because the judicial branch decided to grow a backbone, stand up, and defend the Constitution. Although the program is being suspended, the stolen property is not being returned, and no one is going to jail or even getting a reprimand.

Re:AKA "Stealing from citizens program"

[Catbeller]

Ain't the first time. Hell, most of the country was stolen, by the light of our own laws. (Treaties have the force of the Constitution, so are supreme law). No one seems to sweat that. And outside, we've Puerto Rico, Guam, sorta Cuba (we viewed it as ours), the Phillipines (before the Japanese shook them loose by reconquering them).. all were stolen. Iraq and it's oil. Hawaii. Nothing new about our own people and our own government stealing what they want.

About fucking time

[Anonymous Coward]

Now give the ill gotten gains back

The Fine Print

[PPH]

From TFA:

the Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Program announced that it would defer all equitable sharing payments for forfeitures, both civil and criminal, to state, local, and tribal partners for the foreseeable future.

They are still taking the money. Just not sharing it with local law enforcement.

Err, no - Government does NOT have the right.

[LynnwoodRooster]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. - US Constitution, 4th Amendment

Asset seizures and forfeiture, especially without charges or conviction, are inherently unconstitutional. Of course, when Government gets to arbitrate what is Constitutional, it will naturally decide that a nice, open-ended income stream will always be constitutional - regardless of the actual fact.

If only more people remembered our rights existed before the Government was founded, our rights do not come from Government.

Re:Err, no - Government does NOT have the right.

[LynnwoodRooster]

Unfortunately, many assets are seized and kept without charges even being brought. Seizing assets should only be accompanied by an actual criminal charge (per the 4th Amendment), and kept by the Government only if a conviction is upheld (8th Amendment). Any other seizure and retention is patently unconstitutional.

Re:Err, no - Government does NOT have the right.

[sjames]

It's still a problem. The due process of law doesn't happen until AFTER the assets are taken. The due process is to happen before. Filling out a form is NOT anything like due process.

You mean shakedown?

[gstoddart]

Asset forfeiture has become a program by which law enforcement can shake down citizens without and evidentiary standard, and steal that money for their own departments.

I'm sorry, but can you trust law enforcement when they profit from the misapplication of terrible laws?

For me, no way in hell ... it became a license to steal money like a bunch of crooks. And like a bunch of crooks, they stole everything which wasn't nailed down.

I bet the sheer amount of money which has essentially been stolen by a bunch of thugs with badges is vast. I mean, why wouldn't they steal money from every schmuck they encountered if they could just make shit up and claim they suspected a crime.

You want to see how corruptable police are? Give them free reign to take money without a court to decide, and you'll see exactly what we have now ... a fucking shakedown racket the mob would be proud of.

Re:InB4

[LynnwoodRooster]

For the REAL record, it started with RICO back in 1970 with Congress passing a veto-proof RICO bill. It's grown out of that, reaching full-swing back in the 1970s - and not stopping since then.

John Oliver

[kbsoftware]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Does a good job of explaining and showing the police corruption related to this.