Civil asset forfeiture allows police to seize property in the absence of a criminal charge or the establishment of guilt if police believe they find any evidence of a drug-related crime. There is no proportionlity test - if police find one marijuana plant, for example, they can seize and keep an entire house.

Civil asset forfeiture also has built-in opportunities for abuse. Police are allowed to keep what they seize and in many jurisdictions they budget for anticipated seizures, making it necessary to reach a certain quota.

• In more than 80 percent of asset forfeiture cases the owner of the property is never charged with a crime, yet government officials can and usually do keep the seized property¹.
• "Nothing less than the sanctity of private property is at stake here." - Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.) in a June 22, 1995 press release.
• The most shocking story, according to Rep. Hyde, was the murder of 61 - year old millionaire Donald Scott in front of his wife. Federal officials believed that there was marijuana on Scott's ranch. They were wrong - there wasn't any.

• The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 provided that state and local police agencies may keep 80 percent of seized assets when federal agents are involved. This provision gives law enforcement the power to "go federal" and bypass more restrictive and just state laws. In Kansas City, police have "gone federal" to circumvent a state law that mandates that the proceeds from all assets seized must go to the public school system. By using the federal provision, Kansas City cops have kept loot.
• Police are required by federal law to use seized assets for "law enforcement purposes." In Warren County, N.J. this means that the chief assistant prosecutor drives a yellow Corvette seized in a CAF case.
• According to the General Accounting Office, cash, which is one of the most commonly seized assets, is frequently "mismanaged," and is ripe for theft by police.²

• There is no limit on the assets law enforcement can seize for even the smallest of violations. If a law enforcement agent were to find a marijuana plant growing in someone's backyard, or on their farm, they could seize the entire farm or house, along with the owner's vehicles and anything else owned by that person.

• Currently the law calls for citizens to prove tha their property is "innocent" by a preponderance of the evidence. The citizen in question must prove that the property in question was not used in commission of a crime.
• Raising that standard to the higher "clear and convincing" standard of proof would lessen abuses. Other groups endorsing this provision include the American Bankers Association, Americans for Tax Reform and the Institute for Justice.

• An Aug. 22, 1997 Dateline NBC broadcast revealed that Louisiana police have spent money gained from asset forfeiture on ski trips to Aspen, Colo., meals at local restaurants and shopping trips to Wal-Mart.
• According to the National Association of Criminal Deense Lawyers, agents often pay informants 25 percent of the assets seized in exchange for a tip.

No. While the law may have been intended to punish those foreign cartel leader by seizing their U.S. assets, but state and local law enforcement have used the law whenever possible. Law enforcement even seized a research vessel from the University of Calfornia-San Diego's Oceanography Department when a crew member had a tiny amount of marijuana.

Who is in favor of civil asset forfeiture?

The Department of Justive and police departments that benefit from the sale or distribution of seized assets don't want their cash cow taken away from them. The last time Rep. Hyde tried to push a civil asset forfeiture reform bill through the House, it was the Department of Justice that intervened and killed the bill.