Following reforms adopted in 2015, the District of Columbia’s civil forfeiture laws are now some of the best in the nation, earning a B+. In the District, the general standard-of-proof rule is still too low: The government need only show by a preponderance of the evidence that property is forfeitable. But in order to forfeit vehicles, real property or cash amounts less than $1,000, the government must meet a higher standard, presenting clear and convincing evidence that the property is associated with a crime. And if a property owner faces the forfeiture of her primary residence, at least one owner must be convicted of the offense giving rise to the seizure. The government also bears the burden of proof when an innocent owner makes a claim to regain seized property. Best of all, D.C.’s forfeiture laws no longer provide law enforcement with a financial incentive to forfeit property, as all proceeds must now be deposited into the District’s general fund.

In addition, the District’s reforms entitle property owners to contest seizures in court shortly after they happen, giving them an opportunity to get their car, money or other property back while awaiting a forfeiture trial rather than letting the government hold on to the property. The reform legislation will also substantially improve forfeiture reporting. The data obtained by the Institute for Justice reflect only administrative civil forfeitures reported by the Metropolitan Police Department rather than all types of forfeitures conducted in Washington, D.C. Beginning in 2016, the MPD and the Office of the Attorney General will be required to report their forfeiture activity to the City Council and publish that information on their websites.