Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: What you should know about civil asset forfeiture
Explainer: What you should know about civil asset forfeiture
Jan 19, 2026 1:40 AM

Earlier this week, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the Justice Department would be reinstating the Equitable Sharing Program, a controversial policy related to civil asset forfeiture. Several states have been making it more difficult to apply such forfeitures so this allows state and local law enforcement to explicitly circumvent state forfeiture restrictions.

Here’s what you should know aboutcivil asset forfeiture.

What is civil asset forfeiture?

Civil asset forfeiture (hereafter CAF) is a controversial legal tool that allows law enforcement officials to seize property they claim has been involved in specific criminal activity.

Typically, civil law involves disputes between private citizens while criminal law involves disputes between private citizens and the state (i.e., the “people” represent the interest of victims). CAF is a hybrid of the two, a dispute between the state and a private citizen’s property. Because CAF proceedings charge the property itself with involvement in a crime, the property owner must prove the property was not involved in criminal activity. Such property can include land, vehicles, cash, personal possessions, etc.

As the Department of Justice notes, it is “because civil forfeiture actions are brought against the property directly that federal civil forfeiture cases have what appear to be very peculiar names, such as United States v. Ninety Three(93) Firearms, 330 F.3d 414 (6th Cir. 2003), United States v. One 1992 Ford Mustang GT, 73 F. Supp. 2d 1131 (C.D. Cal. 1999), or United States v. $557,933.89, More or Less, in U.S. Funds, 287 F.3d 66 (2d Cir. 2002).

How can mit a crime?

It can’t, as even the Justice Department admits:

At one time, it was said that civil forfeiture was based on the legal fiction that the property itself was guilty of the offense. That is no longer true. Although the property is named as the defendant in the civil forfeiture case, it is not because the property did anything wrong. Things do mit crimes. mit crimes using or obtaining things that consequently e forfeitable to the state. The in rem structure of civil forfeiture is simply procedural convenience. It is a way for the government to identify the thing that is subject to forfeiture and the grounds therefor, and to give everyone with an interest in the property the opportunity e into court at one time and contest the forfeiture action.

Is civil asset forfeiture state or federal law?

Both. Only seven states and D.C. block law enforcement access to forfeiture proceeds. But because of a recent change by the Justice Department, all local law enforcement agencies have access to CAF through participation in “equitable sharing” (see below) with the federal government.

What is “equitable sharing”?

Equitable sharing allows state and local law enforcement to team with the federal government to forfeit property under federal law instead of state law. Participating agencies allow the federal government to keep some of the proceeds from the sell of the seized property, though they may receive up to 80 percent for themselves.

In 2015, President Obama ended the Equitable Sharing Program, but it was reinstated this month by the Trump administration.

In fiscal year 2016, the states received $314,983,323 in cash and sale proceeds from the federal equitable sharing program.

How long has civil asset forfeiture been used?

Although some form of civil forfeiture has existed since the founding of the United States, the modern form dates back to the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984. This federal law authorized federal officials to implement a national asset forfeiture program.

What is the purpose of the federal civil asset forfeiture program?

According to the Department of Justice, the Justice Asset Forfeiture Program is an initiative that “removes the tools of crime from criminal organizations, deprives wrongdoers of the proceeds of their crimes, recovers property that may be used pensate victims, and deters crime. The most important objective of the Program is law enforcement. Equitable sharing further enhances this law enforcement objective by fostering cooperation among federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.”

How is property federally forfeited?

At the federal level, forfeiture can be administrative, judicial, criminal, and civil.

Administrative forfeiture is the process by which federal seizing agencies may declare property forfeited to the U.S. government without judicial involvement. Seizures must be based on probable cause. Among DOJ civil forfeitures from 1997 to 2013, 88 percent took place administratively.

Judicial forfeiture, both civil and criminal, is the process by which property is declared forfeited to the United States by a court.

Criminal forfeiture is an action brought as part of the criminal prosecution of a defendant that includes the forfeiture of property used or derived from the crime. If the defendant is convicted, the judge or the jury may find that the property is forfeitable.

Civil forfeiture is a proceeding brought against the property rather than against the person mitted the offense. Civil forfeiture does not require either criminal charges against the owner of the property or a criminal conviction. To obtain a federal forfeiture, the Government must prove the forfeiture and the connection between the property and the crime by a preponderance of the evidence.

What is the burden of proof for seizing property?

In federal law and 35 states, the burden of proof is placed on the owners of the property to prove they had nothing to do with the alleged crime. As the Institute for Justice explains,

In essence, most civil forfeiture laws presume that people are connected to any criminal activity involving their property and force them to prove otherwise to recover it. This is precisely the opposite of what happens in criminal trials, where the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty by the government. It also often involves a practical impossibility, as it requires people to prove a negative—that they did not know about or consent to the illegal use of their property.

What if property is taken from an innocent person?

A person must prove they are innocent of the crime to get back their seized property. According to the Justice Department:

To protect the interests of truly innocent property owners who were unaware that their property was being used for an illegal purpose, or who took all reasonable steps under the circumstances to stop it, Congress has enacted a “uniform innocent owner defense.” See 18 U.S.C. § 983(d). Under that statute, a person contesting the forfeiture must establish ownership interests and innocence by a preponderance of the evidence.

If a claimant is successful in proving their innocence in a civil forfeiture case, Congress has mandated they are entitled to have the government pay all attorneys fees and other litigation expenses.

How much property is seized each year?

In fiscal year 2016, a total of $1,921,273,552 was collected in the sale of seized property by the federal government.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Fertile Ground for Farm Subsidy Cuts
Here’s the piece I contributed to today’s Acton News & Commentary: Fertile Ground for Farm Subsidy Cuts By Elise Amyx With debt and budget negotiations in gridlock, and a growing consensus that federal spending at current levels is unsustainable, political support for farm subsidies is waning fast. What’s more, high crop prices and clear injustices are building bipartisan support for significantly cutting agricultural subsidies in the 2012 Farm Bill. The New Deal introduced an enormous number of agriculture subsidy programs...
Rev. Sirico: The Church as the Bride of Caesar
From the “What Would Jesus Cut” campaign to the Circle of Protection, Jim Wallis’s liberal activism rooted in his “religious witness” has grabbed headlines across the nation . Wallis advocates for the “protection” of the poor and vulnerable by pushing for expansive government welfare programs. However, has Wallis effectively analyzed all of the programs for efficiency before advocating for their preservation? In the National Review Online, Rev. Sirico raises many concerns about the Circle of Protection campaign underway by Wallis...
The Patriot Act and the Threat to the Rule of Law
Three of the Acton Institute’s core values are dignity of the person, the rule of law and the subsidiary role of government.The Patriot Act, passed in 2001, violates these fundamental principles. In the United States and elsewhere, freedom and protection against unreasonable government intrusion have been considered essential to a democratic society.Near the start of the American Revolution, the Founding Fathers and the American colonists had grown tired of English interference. A particularly inflammatory usage of law was “the British...
Circling the Sacred Debt Wagons
In my mentary addressing the nation’s debt crisis I included words from Admiral James B. Stockdale. The full es from an essay on public virtue from the book Thoughts of A Philosophical Fighter Pilot. In his 1988 publication, Stockdale declared: Those who study the rise and fall of civilizations learn that no ing has been surely fatal to republics as a dearth of public virtue, the unwillingness of those who govern to place the value of their society above personal...
Call of the Entrepreneur Continues to Air on BIZ TV
Acton Institute would like to invite you to tune into BIZ TV for showings of The Call of the Entrepreneur, the first documentary released by ActonMedia. BIZ TV will be presenting the film today (July 29) at 5:00 pm EST, tomorrow (July 30) at 8:00 am EST, and Sunday, July 31 at 7:00 pm EST. BIZ TV is a network focused on airing inspirational true stories and informative talk shows that educate and motivate America’s entrepreneurs and small business owners,...
The Privilege of Responsibility
This past weekend in Chicago a luncheon was held for the kickoff of college football’s Big 10 Conference. Michigan State University quarterback, Kirk Cousins, was featured at the conference, giving an honorary talk on his journey through four years in college football, and the important lessons he took away from his experience. Cousin’s stresses the opportunity given to him at MSU was one of privilege. Unlike most haughty star athletes, Kirk Cousins seem to understand what it truly means to...
What the Common Good Isn’t
It looks like Congress will vote later today or this evening to raise the debt ceiling and avert a possible default by the United States Treasury. How the debt promise will fair when measured against Acton’s Principles for Budget Reform it is too early to know, but one thing is certain: if the deal contains a single budget cut for even the most ineffective of social programs, we’ll hear screams of protest from Jim Wallis and his Circle of Protection....
John Locke and a Chinese Investiture Controversy
Acton’s Director of Research Dr. Samuel Gregg has two new pieces today, in Public Discourse and The American Spectator. The first is a response to Greg Forster’s“Taking Locke Seriously” on June 27 in First Things. In that article, Forster took issue with Gregg’s June 22 Public Discourse piece, “Social Contracts, Human Flourishing, and the Economy.” Gregg argues, in a July 29 response to Forster titled “John Locke and the Inadequacies of Social Contract Theory,” that Locke’s political thought is based...
Circle of Protection Ads: A Telling Distortion of Scripture
The Circle of Protectionradio advertisementsbeing broadcast in three states right now make their arguments, such as they are, from a quotation of the Bible and a federal poverty program that might be cut in a debt promise. But the scriptural quotation is a serious misuse of the Book of Proverbs, and the claims about heating assistance programs are at best overblown: the ads are really no better than their goofy contemporary piano track. The Circle of Protection, of which the...
Rev. Sirico: Wealth Creation, Not Wealth Redistribution
Does the Circle of Protection actually help the poor? What may be surprising to many of those who are advocating for the protection of just about any welfare program is that these may not alleviate poverty but only redistribute wealth. Rev. Sirico explained in an interview with the National Catholic Register how the discussion should be about wealth creation, not wealth redistribution: Father Robert Sirico, president of the Acton Institute, a conservative think tank based in Grand Rapids, Mich., suggested...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved