Law enforcement may keep some or all of what they take, depending on the state. In 13 states and the District of Columbia, agencies are not required to record or report what they’ve taken — or how much it’s worth, or why it was confiscated in the first place.
It’s a power that opens the door for abuse by law enforcement, particularly cash-strapped agencies. Fortunately, 24 states have implemented reforms and even more have debated curbing the practice.
But this week, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced plans to expand forfeiture on a federal level.
“We plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures,” Sessions said in prepared remarks delivered Monday to the National District Attorneys Association. “No criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime.”
But because a person does not need to have been convicted of – nor even charged with – a crime to have assets seized, it is often not criminals targeted by law enforcement. As Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in March:
These forfeiture operations frequently target the poor and other groups least able to defend their interests in forfeiture proceedings. … 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.