In 2014, IJ launched its End Forfeiture initiative, an effort focused on radically reforming—or altogether ending—civil forfeiture laws throughout the country. Through this initiative, IJ fights against civil forfeiture in statehouses, courts of law and courts of public opinion. 

Today, three states—Montana (2015), New Mexico (2015), and Maine (2021)—have abolished civil forfeiture entirely and only use criminal law to forfeit property. A fourth, North Carolina (1985), banned civil forfeiture except in racketeering cases.  

State Reforms for Civil Forfeiture Laws

Since 2014, 39 states and the District of Columbia have reformed their civil forfeiture laws:

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming District of Columbia

States that Require the Government to Bear the Burden of Proof

Nineteen states and the District of Columbia always require the government to bear the burden of proof for innocent-owner claims:

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming District of Columbia

States with Reporting Requirements

Forty-three states and the District of Columbia have reporting requirements for seizure and/or forfeiture activity:

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming District of Columbia

However, some reporting requirements are better than others. Read IJ’s Forfeiture & Transparency Accountability report here: https://ij.org/report/forfeiture-transparency-accountability/

States with Limits on Equitable Sharing

Eleven states and the District of Columbia have tried to curb equitable sharing through legislative reforms in one or more of the following ways: establishing a minimum threshold for either transferring funds to the federal government or receiving equitable sharing funds; requiring a criminal charge or conviction; banning adoptions; or sending equitable sharing proceeds to the general fund.

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming District of Columbia