It's time for law enforcement agencies around the United States to reign in the controversial and out-of-control civil asset forfeiture program.

This practice has helped the government to confiscate billions of dollars from Americans, many who were never charged or convicted of any crime in relation to the confiscation of their property.

The practice has frequently brought the police into a negative light and put their reputation into disrepute, because quite often the purchases that they make with the funds seem rather unjustified and outlandish.

Not only that, but many civil liberties advocates, Constitutional scholars, and legal professionals etc, have insisted for quite some time that this practice is a clear violation of Constitutional rights; it seems to blatantly violate due process of law.

Many states have tried to pass their own rules to restrict this sort of activity and limit the confiscations by requiring a conviction before any property can be confiscated.

However, the federal government has previously signaled their interest to have law enforcement disregard these attempts to foil the practice, and suggested that instead law enforcement in the country should ramp-up civil asset forfeiture overall.

In Alabama alone, they're said to have some of the worst civil forfeiture laws in the country.

And law enforcement there have been able to confiscate millions of dollars by engaging in this practice. The major driving factor for the police action it turns out? Cannabis offenses. And unfortunately the profit motive here is overshadowing what should be a basic adherence to due process of law and the administration of justice.

Q...

If someone is simply in possession of cannabis, or cannabis-related paraphernalia, should they really have thousands of dollars confiscated from them? Their home or vehicle taken from them? All while they didn't engage in any violent crime and there was no victim in relation to their actions of consuming or possessing that cannabis? It seems a bit drastic and unfair, and it's no wonder that it's fueled such resentment toward law enforcement.

Just this week, Alabama lawmakers filed a new bill that is seeking to reform this practice, known as the Forfeiture Accountability and Integrity Reform (FAIR) Act.

According to one of the Senators behind the bill, Arthurt Orr, he wasn't aware until more recently the details of the practice.

“I thought we had always required a criminal conviction before seizing someone's property. I wasn't aware that wasn't the case until two years ago, and that's the reason I filed a bill last year and why I intend to do so again this year,” - Orr admits.

They want to abolish civil asset forfeiture and replace that instead with criminal forfeiture. If passed, the bill seeks to ensure that only individuals who have been charged and convicted, would lose their property to forfeiture.

Law enforcement should prove with evidence, beyond any reasonable doubt that someone is guilty of a crime, whereas now they simply need to prove that there is reasonable satisfaction to go after the property and individual.

Civil asset forfeiture practices might have been first intended to go after mutli-million dollar drug dealers, but the results haven't been that, and it's causing problems for many Americans. And when an innocent person gets swept up in this mess, the onus is on them to prove that their property was innocent. Many people cannot afford the tens of thousands it's going to cost to endure that sort of legal battle. It's really a self-destructive practice that hopefully more lawmakers seek to put an end to.

If passed, the new bill is going to require police in AL to have a conviction before taking property away. It also looks to establish a clear mechanism for innocent parties to challenge what they believe is unjust civil asset forfeiture action, as well as shed some more light on the details of the practice and where the funds end-up.

Pics:
via tenthamendmentcenter.com
via netrightdaily.com
sheneman via NJ.com

Sources:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2018/01/24/new-alabama-bill-would-abolish-civil-forfeiture-require-convictions-to-confiscate-property/#456ff3d82c38
http://reason.com/blog/2018/01/23/alabama-raked-in-22-million-in-civil-ass
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2018/01/alabama_lawmakers_introduce_bi.html
https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/research--commentary-alabama-working-to-reform-its-civil-asset-forfeiture-laws
https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-asset-forfeiture-ensnares-the-innocent-1489784068
http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2016/05/new-hampshire-asset-forfeiture-bill-unmasks-power-of-police-lobby/

Alabama Lawmakers Move To Rein In Out Of Control Civil Asset Forfeiture Practice

It's time for law enforcement agencies around the United States to reign in the controversial and out-of-control civil asset forfeiture program.

Many states have tried to pass their own rules to restrict this sort of activity and limit the confiscations by requiring a conviction before any property can be confiscated.

In Alabama alone, they're said to have some of the worst civil forfeiture laws in the country.

Q...

Just this week, Alabama lawmakers filed a new bill that is seeking to reform this practice, known as the Forfeiture Accountability and Integrity Reform (FAIR) Act.

Related Posts:

Authorities In Alabama Sued Over Abusive Speed Trap

Class Action Status Sought Over Civil Asset Forfeiture Abuse

Kentucky Farmer Fights Back Against Civil Asset Forfeiture

Wisconsin Man Has Life Savings Confiscated After Minor Traffic Stop