Civil Asset Forfeiture: Federal Law And Its Reach

Civil asset forfeiture is a legal tool that allows law enforcement to seize property that is involved in a crime, without requiring a criminal conviction. In the United States, civil forfeiture seizures can occur at both the state and federal level. Federal law recognises three types of forfeiture: criminal forfeiture, civil judicial forfeiture, and administrative forfeiture. This article will explore the circumstances under which civil asset forfeiture can be sought under federal law.

Criminal forfeiture

Civil asset forfeiture can be sought under federal law in the United States. There are three types of forfeiture under federal law: criminal forfeiture, civil judicial forfeiture, and administrative forfeiture.

Civil judicial forfeiture, on the other hand, is a judicial process that does not require a criminal conviction. It is a legal tool that allows law enforcement to seize property that is involved in a crime. The government simply files a civil action in rem against the property itself and must generally prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the property is forfeitable under the applicable forfeiture statute.

In 2000, lawmakers passed the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA), which stipulated protections for individuals and increased the level of proof required for civil forfeiture. However, critics argued that the new guidelines did not require poor persons to have free access to legal services.

Civil forfeiture in the United States has a long history, dating back to English law. It was commonly used during the Prohibition era to seize the property of bootleggers and was later revived in the 1980s during the War on Drugs. With the increasing concerns about the drug trade and other criminal activity, Congress enacted the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984.

Civil judicial forfeiture

Civil asset forfeiture can be sought under federal law. There are three types of forfeiture under federal law: criminal forfeiture, civil judicial forfeiture, and administrative forfeiture. Civil judicial forfeiture is a judicial process that does not require a criminal conviction and allows law enforcement to seize property that is involved in a crime.

Civil forfeiture begins when the government suspects that a property is connected with illegal drug activity, and files a civil action in rem against the property itself. The government must then prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the property is forfeitable under the applicable forfeiture statute. In 2000, lawmakers passed the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA), which stipulated protections for individuals and increased the level of proof required. However, critics argued that the new guidelines did not require poor persons to have free access to legal services.

The number of federal statutes permitting government forfeiture has doubled since the 1990s, from 200 to 400. Civil forfeiture in the United States is a holdover from English law and was commonly used during the Prohibition era to seize the property of bootleggers. When Prohibition ended, civil forfeiture was not as commonly used until the War on Drugs began in the 1980s. In response to concerns about the drug trade and other criminal activity, Congress enacted the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984.

In 2015, Eric Holder ended the policy of "adoptive forfeiture", which allowed state or local law enforcement agencies to seize property pursuant to state law and request that a federal agency forfeit it under federal law. This policy was ended due to abuse, but actions by the Justice Department in 2017 have sought to reinstate police seizure powers.

Administrative forfeiture

Civil asset forfeiture can be sought under federal law. There are three types of forfeiture under federal law: criminal forfeiture, civil judicial forfeiture, and administrative forfeiture.

The process of administrative forfeiture typically begins when the government suspects that a property is connected with illegal activity, such as drug crimes. The government will then file a civil action against the property itself, known as an “in rem” action. This means that the action is taken against the property rather than a person.

During the administrative forfeiture process, the government must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the property is connected to illegal activity and is therefore forfeitable. This means that the government must show that it is more likely than not that the property was used in or derived from illegal activity.

Overall, administrative forfeiture is a powerful tool for the government to combat illegal activity and seize property connected to it. However, it is important to ensure that the process is fair and just, and that individuals' rights are protected.

Civil forfeiture seizures at the state level

Civil forfeiture seizures can occur at the state level in the US, but these are not tracked and recorded in a central database, making it difficult to make assessments. This is because state laws and procedures vary widely.

Civil forfeiture begins when the government suspects that a property is connected with illegal drug activity, and files a civil action. The government files a civil action in rem against the property itself, and then generally must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the property is forfeitable under the applicable forfeiture statute.

In 2015, Eric Holder ended the policy of "adoptive forfeiture", which occurred when a state or local law enforcement agency seizes property under state law and requests that a federal agency takes the seized asset and forfeits it under federal law. This was due to abuse of the policy. However, actions by the Justice Department in July 2017 have sought to reinstate police seizure powers.

The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act, or CAFRA, was passed in 2000. This stipulated protections for individuals and increased the level of proof required for civil forfeiture. Critics said that the new guidelines did not require poor persons to have free access to legal services. CAFRA suggests that if a claimant wins a civil-forfeiture case, some of the legal fees paid to recover the property are partially payable by the government.

The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act

Civil asset forfeiture can be sought under federal law. There are three types of forfeiture under federal law: criminal forfeiture, civil judicial forfeiture, and administrative forfeiture.

In 2000, lawmakers passed the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act, or CAFRA, which stipulated protections for individuals and increased the level of proof required. The act was supposed to raise the government's burden of proof before seizing property. However, critics said that the new guidelines did not require poor persons to have free access to legal services. CAFRA guidelines suggest that if a claimant wins a civil forfeiture case, some of the legal fees paid to recover the property are partially payable by the government.

Civil forfeiture begins when the government suspects that a property is connected with illegal drug activity and files a civil action. The government files a civil action in rem against the property itself and then must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the property is forfeitable under the applicable forfeiture statute. Civil forfeiture is a holdover from English law and was commonly used by the government during the Prohibition era to seize the property of bootleggers.

In 2015, Eric Holder ended the policy of "adoptive forfeiture", which occurred when a state or local law enforcement agency seizes property pursuant to state law and requests that a federal agency takes the seized asset and forfeits it under federal law. This was due to abuse of the policy.

Frequently asked questions