Talk:Civil forfeiture in the United States

Suggested updates and edits to this page

           Introduction

·       Suggested edit the final sentence of the final paragraph in the introductory section on this page, it should read:

A 2020 study found that the median cash forfeiture in 21 states which track such data was less than $1,300

           War on Drugs (1980-present)

·       The final paragraph of this sentence is inaccurate, out of date and incomplete. We suggest the following edits to make it accurate:

In 2015, Attorney General Eric Holder temporarily 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 take the seized asset and forfeit it under federal law" due to abuse. Adoptive seizures account for just 30% of equitable sharing forfeiture cases and 17% of the total value forfeited under equitable sharing between 2000 and 2015. [Cite] Although states dramatically reduced proceeded to curtail the powers of police to seizures of assets for adoptive forfeitures while Holder's policy was in place, in July 2017 Attorney General Jeff Sessions largely actions by the Justice Department in July 2017 have sought to reinstated these police seizure powers that simultaneously raise funding for federal agencies and local law enforcement.

           Seizure of real estate

·       In the section, the photograph is of a motel located in Tewksbury, Massachusetts, not Chelmsford, Massachusetts.

Contested seizures

·       In the section, please consider adding the following information, which will provide specific examples to readers about those who successfully contested the seizure of their money and other property:

In 2013, Terry Dehko a grocery store owner in Fraser, Michigan filed suit against the IRS, which had seized Dehko’s bank account without charging him with a crime but claiming he had made frequent deposits of less than $10,000 into his bank account in an effort to avoid bank regulations. Later that year, the IRS returned Dehko’s money.

In 2014, residents of Philadelphia filed a class action lawsuit challenging the city’s of civil forfeiture, which often targeted minorities and the poor. In 2018, the city agreed to return $3 million in seized assets to those whose cash and property was taken.

Iowa restaurant owner Carole Hinders had her bank account of $33,000 seized by the IRS, despite never being accused of a crime. She fought the forfeiture and in 2014 the IRS agreed to return all of her money.

Jeffrey, Richard and Mitch Hirsch from Long Island, New York filed suit after the IRS seized $446,000 from their candy and snack wholesale company without filing any criminal complaint against them. The Hirsch brothers had made deposits of under $10,000 into their bank account, which the government called “structuring.” In 2015, the IRS agreed to return all of the Hirsch’s money.

While on a fundraising tour of the United States to help raise money to fund an orphanage in Thailand and a school in Burma, members of a Burmese Christian rock band had more than $53,000 seized by Muskogee, Oklahoma sheriff’s deputies in a traffic stop. In 2016, the Institute for Justice secured the return of the band’s money.

Additional lawsuits successfully challenging civil forfeiture have been litigated in North Carolina, Kentucky, New Mexico, Connecticut and Wyoming.

Critics

·       In the second paragraph, in the beginning of the fourth sentence, please consider updating Scott Bullock’s title from “senior attorney at” to “president of” the Institute for Justice.

Critics are from both sides of the political spectrum, from left-leaning groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, the libertarian Institute for Justice, and right-leaning groups such as The Heritage Foundation.

Efforts at reform

·       Because there are more than two sides of the political spectrum, please consider the following edit:

Critics are from both sides of the political spectrum, from left-leaning groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, the libertarian Institute for Justice, and right-leaning groups such as The Heritage Foundation.

Innocent owners ensnared.

§  Please consider adding the following example:

While on a fundraising tour of the United States to help raise money to fund an orphanage in Thailand and a school in Burma, members of a Burmese Christian rock band had more than $53,000 seized by Muskogee, Oklahoma sheriff’s deputies in a traffic stop.

In 2018, the Institute for Justice earned two court victories on behalf of Arlene Harjo from Albuquerque, New Mexico, after the government seized and sought to forfeit her vehicle after he son drove under the influence. In a four year period from 2010 to 2014, Albuquerque had seized more than 8,600 vehicles, one vehicle for each 66 residents, and had earned more than $1,000,000 a year through the seizures, giving the government a direct financial incentive to take as many vehicles as possible. Lyrical42 (talk) 15:02, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Civil Asset Forfeiture - Constitutional Violations

4th Amendment Violation - Property can not be seized without a crime (cause). 5th Amendment Violation - Due Process of Law, government must prove a crime has been committed, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

 Death Penalty - Government must prove a crime has been committed, and execution a proscribed punishment.  Failure to do so, is homicide (a crime) by government. 

 Imprisonment - Government must prove a crime has been committed, and imprison a proscribed punishment.  Failure to do so, is abduction (a crime) by government. 

Seizing of Property - Government must prove a crime has been committed, and seizing of property a prescribed punishment.  Failure to do so is theft (a crime) by government.

Due Process of law, as in not an optional.

8th Amendment Violation - Excessive Fines, no crime is charge, property is stolen (SIC) from owner.

9th Amendment Violation - Does not allow enumerated rights to be infringed, denied or depreciated.

76.135.82.13 (talk) 23:33, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Tae Hyun Song

I am noticing removal of sections in the Talk Tab, necessary for comprehensive understanding of Civil Asset Forfeiture. 76.135.82.13 (talk) 23:33, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Monetary Incentive to Vandalize Civil Asset Forfeiture Article

Proponents tout how much money they have seized (stolen). Literally billions of dollars. Apparently, there are types of people who see nothing wrong with abusing government powers. Or so ignorant they don't even realize they are stealing money and supposedly in law enforcement.

Possibly they do know they are in fact stealing money, proves they are criminal.

The article needs protection from being vandalized by people making money off Civil Asset Forfeiture or ignorant law enforcement.

76.135.82.13 (talk) 03:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)Tae Hyun Song