The House Tells Sessions Justice Department It Will Not Stand for Civil Asset Forfeiture

[riversedge]

Source: aclu.org



September 13, 2017 | 3:30 PM



The U.S. House sent a strong message of rebuke to Attorney General Jeff Sessions on civil asset forfeiture last night. The House adopted three amendments offered to an appropriations bill that prohibit the Department of Justice from using funds to increase certain federal and local forfeiture practices.

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) summed up the problem with civil asset forfeiture in one sentence. “It is an unconstitutional practice that is used to violate the due process rights of innocent people,” he said from the House floor.

This bipartisan showing was in response to Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ July announcement to expand the use of civil forfeiture. Sessions’ action was a reversal of a 2015 Attorney General Eric Holder policy that prevented local law enforcement from using federal forfeiture laws to circumvent more restrictive state forfeiture laws.

........................................
The ACLU joined a diverse set of partners in support of these amendments. Our organizations believe that the “civil forfeiture system undermines property rights and is fundamentally unjust.” The ACLU is particularly concerned with civil forfeitures’ impact on poor people and people of color. As Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) said on the House floor yesterday, “Forfeiture efforts tend to target poor neighborhoods” and that forfeiture “does not discriminate between the innocent and the guilty.”

The House votes also signaled that Congress remains committed to comprehensive civil forfeiture reform. Like Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) said, “This amendment is a starting point, and we can’t stop here.” The ACLU will continue its work with members on both sides of the aisle to advance legislation like the Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration (FAIR) Act and the DUE PROCESS Act. These bills would provide important procedural protections for those who want their day in court to challenge forfeitures, and the FAIR Act would address the profit incentive that is driving forfeiture.

................................

Read more: https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/reforming-police-practices/house-tells-sessions-justice-department-it-will

---

I have to admit, I did not think the house had it in them to go against Sessions.

Link to tweet

[riversedge]

1. Feinstein and Grassley sent letter about abuses of money taken..............

...................
web17-JeffSessionsGlasses-1160x768d.jpg
Jeff Sessions

The U.S. House sent a strong message of rebuke to Attorney General Jeff Sessions on civil asset forfeiture last night. The House adopted three amendments offered to an appropriations bill that prohibit the Department of Justice from using funds to increase certain federal and local forfeiture practices.

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) summed up the problem with civil asset forfeiture in one sentence. “It is an unconstitutional practice that is used to violate the due process rights of innocent people,” he said from the House floor.

This bipartisan showing was in response to Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ July announcement to expand the use of civil forfeiture. Sessions’ action was a reversal of a 2015 Attorney General Eric Holder policy that prevented local law enforcement from using federal forfeiture laws to circumvent more restrictive state forfeiture laws.

The House votes also signaled that Congress remains committed to comprehensive civil forfeiture reform.

The ACLU joined a diverse set of partners in support of these amendments. Our organizations believe that the “civil forfeiture system undermines property rights and is fundamentally unjust.” The ACLU is particularly concerned with civil forfeitures’ impact on poor people and people of color. As Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) said on the House floor yesterday, “Forfeiture efforts tend to target poor neighborhoods” and that forfeiture “does not discriminate between the innocent and the guilty.”

The House votes also signaled that Congress remains committed to comprehensive civil forfeiture reform. Like Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) said, “This amendment is a starting point, and we can’t stop here.” The ACLU will continue its work with members on both sides of the aisle to advance legislation like the Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration (FAIR) Act and the DUE PROCESS Act. These bills would provide important procedural protections for those who want their day in court to challenge forfeitures, and the FAIR Act would address the profit incentive that is driving forfeiture.

Over on the Senate side, civil forfeiture reformers, like Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), also had a bone to pick with the practice. Yesterday, Grassley wrote Sessions expressing outrage with the U.S. Marshals’ misuse of forfeiture funds. The marshals have used forfeiture funds to furnish a Texas facility with “high-end granite countertops and expensive custom artwork” despite a prohibition of such purchases with forfeiture funds. Forfeiture funds “should not be treated as a slush fund for extravagances,” Grassley said.

And Grassley’s letter coincides with other forfeiture abuses coming to light in recent weeks. Over the weekend, a U.C. Berkley police officer seized $60 from a hot dog vendor for not having the appropriate permits. Last week, we learned that a Tennessee Department of Safety & Homeland Security improperly spent over $100,000 in forfeiture funds on catering and banquet tickets. Today the Institute for Justice announced it is suing U.S. Customs and Border Protection for the indefinite detention of a truck seized at a border crossing. ...................




https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/constituents/2017-09-12%20CEG%20to%20DOJ%20%28USMS%20AFF%20Spending%20and%20Memorandum%29.pdf

[Corvo Bianco]

11. Yuck.

[Angry Dragon]

2. little greedy son of a bitch

[NanceGreggs]

3. He's probably REALLY pissed now ...

... and will be whining about it to his Russian friends - ya know, the ones he never had any contact with.

[Dustlawyer]

4. Those Republicans must really hate the evil elf shitbag!

Also, middle class and wealthy constituents have been getting hit as well because that is where the money is!

[BigmanPigman]

5. A few months ago I asked DUers how we could get 45's money if found guilty

and someone replied that Sessions is proposing this. I want to see Manafort, Flynn, the fake prez and his family and rich buddies who sold our country to Russia to be sent to jail forever and for them to lose all their money too. They live for money, they are traitors for money and they should be penniless like Bernie Madoff. THAT would be justice.

[Perseus]

7. Sessions proposed it?

How could he? He may be found guilty of collusion as well, he is part of the gang.

Can you provide a link please?

[BigmanPigman]

8. It is the same thing that is in this post.

The difference is who it is applied to. If it allows the government to abuse or take away rights of minorities that is BAD. However, I am looking at the one GOOD aspect of it which is how it would apply to the fake prez, etc. I know it is harmful to many but the silver lining is that it would bankrupt the greedy sociopaths that sold (and currently are selling) our country to the Russians and whoever else has money to bribe and influence people in power like Flynn and Manafort with countries like Turkey, Ukraine, Saudi Arabia, UAE, ...

[WinkyDink]

13. We can wait until proven guilty...in all cases.

[WinkyDink]

12. Preach!

[TomSlick]

6. The civil forfeiture process is so patently unjust even the Repunants know it.

That's just how screwed up it is.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

9. Example of federal judge finding civil forfeiture unconstitutional.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2017/08/31/federal-judges-rules-indiana-seizing-cars-with-civil-forfeiture-is-unconstitutional/#3adedef23da5

[red dog 1]

10. K&R...Thanks for posting

(I don't think the Orange POS in the WH will like this!)

[Nitram]

14. I'm shocked! House Republicans still have an iota of decency left?

Whoda thunkit?