North Dakota Takes A Bite Out Of Civil Asset Forfeiture

On May 2, 2019, North Dakota took a major first step in civil asset forfeiture reform. Governor Doug Burgum signed House Bill 1286, which goes a long way in limiting law enforcement agencies’ ability to arrest people, seize their property, and keep what they’ve seized even in cases where no crime can be proven.

Over the years, civil asset forfeiture has gained notoriety in criminal justice reform circles. Generally speaking, civil asset forfeiture has been a proven tactic in the so-called “War on Drugs” to target the assets of affluent drug lords.

However, as witnessed with countless other government programs, civil asset forfeiture has devolved into a money grab for corrupt law enforcement bureaucracies.

Scott Shackford of Reason points out that civil asset forfeiture “has instead grown into a massively corrupt mechanism where police agencies pull people over or raid their houses on whatever pretext the cops can muster.” According to the Reason writer, “North Dakota’s rules were particularly bad for the citizens.”

In fact, North Dakota is one of the worst states when it comes to civil asset forfeiture. It received a dishonorable F grade in the Institute for Justice’s “Policing for Profit” report. The only other state that received such an abysmal score was Massachusetts.

According to Shackford, “North Dakota’s rules were particularly bad for the citizens.” Before HB 1286 received the Governor’s signature, law enforcement just needed to have probable cause in order to make a property seizure attempt. Law enforcement agencies could even keep up to 100 percent of the properties they seized as long as it was worth less than $200,000.

With HB 1286 in place, police must obtain a conviction before seizing people’s assets. However, there are exemptions if the person is dead, has been deported, has disappeared, or has abandoned their property.

Although the bill sponsor, State Representative Rick Becker, was disappointed with the way the bill was watered down, he is considering putting a question on the ballot in 2020 that would strengthen the rules for asset forfeiture. Nonetheless, HB 1286 is a good first step.

The Supreme Court recently issued a ruling that limits states’ power to levy excessive fines and use civil asset forfeiture to take property.

There’s no question civil asset forfeiture is a promising fight for liberty activists. In times when it appears that government is growing non-stop, small victories like these give us a glimmer of hope. It’s also another reminder that state legislatures should never be ignored because these are the places where we can make the most change.

Related:
Texas Case May Spur Drug Money Rule Change | Attorney General Sessions Announcement on Asset Forfeiture | Police Officer Arrested On Civil Asset Forfeiture Confusion | Civil Forfeiture Explained by John Oliver on HBO | Civil Forfeiture Now Requires A Criminal Conviction In Montana And New Mexico | The AI Data Center Boom: Legal Hurdles and Opportunities | Civil Forfeiture Now Requires A Criminal Conviction In Montana And New Mexico | Intellectual Property Protection in Data Centers: Safeguarding Innovation & Data Assets | The Art of Negotiation: Securing the Best Deal for Your Data Center Acquisition | NPR Articles on Dirty Money Asset Seizures and Forfeitures | Fortune or forfeiture: real estate lending in the cannabis space | How Civil Forfeiture Can Enable Public Officials’ Misuse of Funds | Judge dismisses case over FBI raid of 1,400 private safe-deposit boxes and seizure of millions in jewelry and cash | Forfeited profits: Why the feds chronically undersell seized property | Dan King on Why Biden Should Tackle Civil Asset Forfeiture and Legalized Theft from Americans | Optimizing Your Data Center Investment: Strategies for Success | 5G-Enabled Data Centers: Legal Considerations and Deployment Models | Edge Computing and Its Impact on Data Center Design | Civil Forfeiture Debate | Regulatory Compliance for Cloud & Hybrid Data Centers: Navigating Shared Responsibilities | Why California Has a Unique Forfeiture Landscape | New Hampshire Considers Major Forfeiture Reform | JUSTICE MANUAL 9-116.000 – Equitable Sharing And Federal Adoption | Smart PDUs & Data Center Power Management: Legal & Operational Insights

Additional Reading:
The Difference Between Administrative and Judicial Forfeiture | JUSTICE MANUAL 9-117.000 – Department Of Justice Assets Forfeiture Fund | Why Civil Forfeiture Is Controversial in California | An Airbnb Tenant From Hell – Business Insider | Government self-interest corrupted a crime-fighting tool into an evil | Two Minutes with Tim – Civil Asset Forfeiture (Ep13) | A new twist on asset forfeiture | Massachusetts Remains a Civil Forfeiture Outlier | Federal Judge Effectively Ends Albuquerque’s Civil Asset Forfeiture Program as Too Focused on Revenue and Not on Due Process | Amazing Civil Asset Forfeiture WIN! (Steve Lehto) | Federal Raids and Asset Forfeiture: What Happens When the Feds Seize Your Property | Seized Asset Defense – Rucci Law | Senator Mike Lee Asks Attorney General Nominee Barr About Civil Asset Forfeiture! | Investigating CPD’s Use of Civil Asset Forfeiture | JUSTICE MANUAL 9-115.000 – Use And Disposition Of Seized And Forfeited Property | Justice Thomas Defends Victims of Policing for Profit | The Forfeiture Machine Turns Cops into Robbers | Seizures of Real Estate for Forfeiture | Houston Prosecutors Profit Millions From Cash Illegally Seized | Judge finds no rights violations in FBI seizure of Beverly Hills safe-deposit boxes | WHAT THE SUPREME COURT RULING COULD MEAN FOR CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURE | HB19: Reforming Civil Asset Forfeiture | Civil Forfeiture Laws And The Continued Assault On Private Property | Asset Forfeiture Legal Resources