Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday said he'd be issuing a new directive this week aimed at increasing police seizures of cash and property.
“We hope to issue this week a new directive on asset forfeiture — especially for drug traffickers,” Sessions said in his prepared remarks for a speech to the National District Attorney's Association in Minneapolis. "With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures. No criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime. Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate as is sharing with our partners."
Asset forfeiture is a disputed practice that allows law enforcement officials to permanently take money and goods from individuals suspected of crime. There is little disagreement among lawmakers, authorities and criminal justice reformers that “no criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime.” But in many cases, neither a criminal conviction nor even a criminal charge is necessary — under forfeiture laws in most states and at the federal level, mere suspicion of wrongdoing is enough to allow police to seize items permanently.
Additionally, many states allow law enforcement agencies to keep cash that they seize, creating what critics characterize as a profit motive. The practice is widespread: In 2014, federal law enforcement officers took more property from citizens than burglars did. State and local authorities seized untold millions more.
Since 2007, the Drug Enforcement Administration alone has taken more than $3 billion in cash from people not charged with any crime, according to the Justice Department's Inspector General.
The practice is ripe for abuse. In one case in 2016, Oklahoma police seized $53,000 owned by a Christian band, an orphanage and a church after stopping a man on a highway for a broken taillight. A few years earlier, a Michigan drug task force raided the home of a self-described “soccer mom,” suspecting she was not in compliance with the state's medical marijuana law. They proceeded to take “every belonging” from the family, including tools, a bicycle and her daughter's birthday money.
In recent years, states have begun to clamp down on the practice.
“Thirteen states now allow forfeiture only in cases where there's been a criminal conviction,” said Robert Everett Johnson, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm that represents forfeiture defendants.
In 2015, Eric Holder's Justice Department issued a memo sharply curtailing a particular type of forfeiture practice that allowed local police to share part of their forfeiture proceeds with federal authorities. Known as “adoptive” forfeiture, it allowed state and local authorities to sidestep sometimes stricter state laws, processing forfeiture cases under the more permissive federal statute.
These types of forfeitures amounted to a small total of assets seized by federal authorities, so the overall impact on forfeiture practices was relatively muted. Still, criminal justice reform groups on the left and the right cheered the move as a signal that the Obama administration was serious about curtailing forfeiture abuses.
In his speech Monday, Attorney General Sessions appeared to specifically call out adoptive forfeitures as an area for potential expansion. “Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate,” he said, “as is sharing with our partners.”
“This is a federalism issue,” Johnson said. “Any return to federal adoptive forfeitures would “circumvent limitations on civil forfeiture that are imposed by state legislatures … the Department of Justice is saying 'we're going to help state and local law enforcement to get around those reforms.'”
The Department of Justice did not return a request for comment.
Source
Showing posts with label abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abuse. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 19, 2017
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
S.B. 443 would rein in civil asset forfeiture abuses in California
From CREDO:
Protect and serve. That’s the role police are supposed to play in our communities. Stealing from innocent Americans? Not so much.
Unfortunately, an unjust, racist policy called civil asset forfeiture encourages police in California to do just that – seize property and cash that is allegedly associated with a crime and keep the assets whether or not anyone is charged or convicted. 1 Those assets go into a “slush fund,” and can be used for almost anything, from armored cars and new technology to luxury vehicles and vacations for law enforcement officers.2 It sends the message to law enforcement: Need money? Just seize some assets.3
Here’s a true story of civil asset forfeiture in action: A taco truck owner is pulled over by the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. When questioned, he is honest about the fact that he is carrying a large sum of money from his legal business. Officers find no evidence of a crime. The man is not arrested, or even charged with a crime. Despite the fact that he has done nothing wrong, the police seize $10,000 dollars from this man. Even with a lawyer, he is never able to navigate the legal channels effectively enough to get his assets back. This happens to thousands of Californians every year, especially to people of color and people living in poverty. California police pocketed nearly $600 million from civil asset forfeiture between 2006 and 2013. Instead of a tool to undermine drug organizations, this form of state-sanctioned robbery is employed as a routine funding source.
Tell the California Legislature: Vote yes on SB 443, to help rein in civil asset forfeiture abuse by law enforcement in California.
The civil asset forfeiture laws we know today were originally designed to take down drug "kingpins," but they have morphed into what amounts to legalized theft by the police.4
The majority of people who have their possessions stolen by law enforcement never even have charges brought against them. At the federal level, 87 percent of cases where assets are seized are civil, not criminal.5 That means that the program isn’t punishing criminals or keeping them off the street, it is simply allowing police to profit off of Americans, especially people who are living in poverty or people of color.
The man who had $10,000 stolen from him was able to hire a lawyer, but was eventually advised by his attorney to drop the case because of the expense, and because what starts as asset forfeiture has been known to morph into more serious situations when challenged – like deportation investigations of undocumented people or their relatives.6 The risk that comes with fighting law enforcement, plus the incredible expense of pursuing justice through the legal system, makes communities of color and low-income communities particularly vulnerable to civil asset forfeiture.
California made changes to limit civil asset forfeiture almost 20 years ago, but police departments have found, and are exploiting, a loophole: the federal "Equitable Sharing Program."7 The state’s heavy participation in that program brings over $50 million in profit to the state every year, making California the second highest state in the country in civil asset forfeiture profits.8 SB 443 would close those loopholes and rein in civil asset forfeiture abuse by law enforcement in California.
Tell the California Legislature: Policing for profit is unacceptable. Vote yes on SB 443. Click the link to sign the petition.
Citations are on the same page you sign the petition.
Protect and serve. That’s the role police are supposed to play in our communities. Stealing from innocent Americans? Not so much.
Unfortunately, an unjust, racist policy called civil asset forfeiture encourages police in California to do just that – seize property and cash that is allegedly associated with a crime and keep the assets whether or not anyone is charged or convicted. 1 Those assets go into a “slush fund,” and can be used for almost anything, from armored cars and new technology to luxury vehicles and vacations for law enforcement officers.2 It sends the message to law enforcement: Need money? Just seize some assets.3
Here’s a true story of civil asset forfeiture in action: A taco truck owner is pulled over by the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. When questioned, he is honest about the fact that he is carrying a large sum of money from his legal business. Officers find no evidence of a crime. The man is not arrested, or even charged with a crime. Despite the fact that he has done nothing wrong, the police seize $10,000 dollars from this man. Even with a lawyer, he is never able to navigate the legal channels effectively enough to get his assets back. This happens to thousands of Californians every year, especially to people of color and people living in poverty. California police pocketed nearly $600 million from civil asset forfeiture between 2006 and 2013. Instead of a tool to undermine drug organizations, this form of state-sanctioned robbery is employed as a routine funding source.
Tell the California Legislature: Vote yes on SB 443, to help rein in civil asset forfeiture abuse by law enforcement in California.
The civil asset forfeiture laws we know today were originally designed to take down drug "kingpins," but they have morphed into what amounts to legalized theft by the police.4
The majority of people who have their possessions stolen by law enforcement never even have charges brought against them. At the federal level, 87 percent of cases where assets are seized are civil, not criminal.5 That means that the program isn’t punishing criminals or keeping them off the street, it is simply allowing police to profit off of Americans, especially people who are living in poverty or people of color.
The man who had $10,000 stolen from him was able to hire a lawyer, but was eventually advised by his attorney to drop the case because of the expense, and because what starts as asset forfeiture has been known to morph into more serious situations when challenged – like deportation investigations of undocumented people or their relatives.6 The risk that comes with fighting law enforcement, plus the incredible expense of pursuing justice through the legal system, makes communities of color and low-income communities particularly vulnerable to civil asset forfeiture.
California made changes to limit civil asset forfeiture almost 20 years ago, but police departments have found, and are exploiting, a loophole: the federal "Equitable Sharing Program."7 The state’s heavy participation in that program brings over $50 million in profit to the state every year, making California the second highest state in the country in civil asset forfeiture profits.8 SB 443 would close those loopholes and rein in civil asset forfeiture abuse by law enforcement in California.
Tell the California Legislature: Policing for profit is unacceptable. Vote yes on SB 443. Click the link to sign the petition.
Citations are on the same page you sign the petition.
Sunday, October 11, 2015
FCC hears about prison phone rate abuse
From Free Press:
Jazlin Mendoza is one of the 2.7 million youths with an incarcerated parent. Phone calls with her father are so pricey that it’s hard for her family to pay for even five minutes of phone time.
The predatory rates phone companies charge for calls made to and from U.S. prisons prompted our friends at MAG-Net to launch a campaign for lower rates. On Tuesday, MAG-Net delivered more than 80,000 signatures urging the FCC to move forward with its proposal to cap these rates. Free Press participated in the petition delivery along with ColorOfChange.org, the Progressive Democrats of America and the United Church of Christ Office of Communication, Inc.
This day of action also included a congressional briefing featuring powerful testimony from people on both sides of the prison divide. In a recording played during the event, Keven Reese, who’s been in prison for 11 years, talked about how hard it is for his family to keep in touch when choosing to answer his phone calls may mean sacrificing Christmas presents for their children.
FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, the agency’s strongest voice for prison-phone justice, noted that stories like these should make all of us feel “outraged.”
We want to thank you for adding your voice to the call for reform. We’ll keep you posted on how the FCC’s vote plays out.
Best,
Dana, Joseph, Candace and the rest of the Free Press team
freepress.net
P.S. We work hard every day to make sure the FCC sides with people and not big corporations. Help us continue to fight back with a monthly donation of $5. Thank you!
It is said that a program that connects prisoners to a healthy supportive family reduces the recidivism rate thus causing less of them to reoffend and return to prison. If it cuts down on the crime rate I'm for it.
Jazlin Mendoza is one of the 2.7 million youths with an incarcerated parent. Phone calls with her father are so pricey that it’s hard for her family to pay for even five minutes of phone time.
The predatory rates phone companies charge for calls made to and from U.S. prisons prompted our friends at MAG-Net to launch a campaign for lower rates. On Tuesday, MAG-Net delivered more than 80,000 signatures urging the FCC to move forward with its proposal to cap these rates. Free Press participated in the petition delivery along with ColorOfChange.org, the Progressive Democrats of America and the United Church of Christ Office of Communication, Inc.
This day of action also included a congressional briefing featuring powerful testimony from people on both sides of the prison divide. In a recording played during the event, Keven Reese, who’s been in prison for 11 years, talked about how hard it is for his family to keep in touch when choosing to answer his phone calls may mean sacrificing Christmas presents for their children.
FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, the agency’s strongest voice for prison-phone justice, noted that stories like these should make all of us feel “outraged.”
We want to thank you for adding your voice to the call for reform. We’ll keep you posted on how the FCC’s vote plays out.
Best,
Dana, Joseph, Candace and the rest of the Free Press team
freepress.net
P.S. We work hard every day to make sure the FCC sides with people and not big corporations. Help us continue to fight back with a monthly donation of $5. Thank you!
It is said that a program that connects prisoners to a healthy supportive family reduces the recidivism rate thus causing less of them to reoffend and return to prison. If it cuts down on the crime rate I'm for it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
