In 2017, the Department of Justice revived a controversial federal forfeiture program the previous administration had sharply curtailed. In defense of these “adoptive forfeitures” or “adoptions,” as well as of civil forfeiture in general, the DOJ claims that 1) civil forfeiture overwhelmingly targets criminals, not innocents, and is thus a valuable crime-fighting tool and 2) the DOJ’s forfeiture program has new “safeguards” in place to ensure adoptions do not cause innocent people to unjustly lose their property. Using the DOJ’s own data—which only partly illuminate the black box that is the federal forfeiture process—this paper finds reason to doubt these claims. Specifically, it finds that the DOJ cannot substantiate its claim that civil forfeiture fights crime. It also concludes that the DOJ’s new safeguards are unlikely to provide meaningful protection to innocent property owners.
Related Cases

Civil Forfeiture | Private Property
Class Action Challenges FBI’s “Take Now, Explain Never” Forfeitures
Linda Martin's home savings were seized by the FBI. She received a confusing forfeiture notice that didn't clearly say what she did wrong for the government to want to take her money.

Civil Forfeiture | Private Property
Police seized an innocent woman’s $8,040, and now she is fighting to have her day in court
Cristal Starling runs a mobile food cart in Rochester, New York, to provide for herself and her grandnephew. She dreamed of expanding the business into a food truck, and she saved enough money to do…

Civil Forfeiture | Private Property
Armored Car Company Sues Federal Law Enforcement and a California Sheriff After Series of Illegal Roadside Seizures
An armored car company sued after a California sheriff teamed up with federal law enforcement to take proceeds from legal cannabis businesses.
In The News
Liberty & Law Article