I believe all this was the result of a Reagan era law as part of the overall War on Drugs. Rather odd that the champion of capitalism and free market would support such a policy, but such is one of the many contradictions we live under.
It's one of the few valid criticisms that would make me seriously question as to whether I want to stay with the Republicans*. I would love to blame the Socialist democrats for this but I can't in this regard.
FYI....
Civil forfeiture in the United States - Wikipedia
Excerpted....
During the later Colonial years, forfeiture practices by the Crown officials using
writs of assistance were one of the many activities that angered colonists, who saw the writs as "unreasonable searches and seizures" that deprived persons of "life, liberty, or property, without due process".
[7] The early
Congress wrote forfeiture laws based on British maritime law to help federal tax collectors collect customs duties, which financed most of the expenses of the federal government in the early days of the republic.
[6] Seizures allowed government to confiscate property from citizens who failed to pay taxes or customs duties.
[5] The Supreme Court upheld these forfeiture statutes in situations where it was virtually impossible to get hold of guilty persons on the high seas while possible to get hold of their property.
[6] During much of the 19th century there was not much attention paid to forfeiture laws.
[6]
Prohibition era[edit]
During
Prohibition,
Detroit police inspect equipment suspected of being used to make alcohol; under civil forfeiture laws, police could seize the equipment without having to charge any owners with a crime.
Government used forfeiture during the
Prohibition years 1920–1933.
[6] Police seized vehicles and equipment and cash and other property from
bootleggers.
[5] When Prohibition ended in 1933, much of the forfeiture activity ended as well, and modern forfeiture was an "infrequent resort" until the last few decades.
[7]
War on Drugs (1980–present)[edit]
Civil forfeiture activity increased substantially in the past thirty years.
[8] It stepped up forfeiture during the
War on Drugs during the early 1980s and onwards.
[6] It became harder for criminal organizations to launder dirty money by means of the financial system, so drug cartels preferred bulk payments of cash.
[9] Illegal drugs are a big business; one estimate was that the annual profit from selling illegal drugs was $12 billion, according to the
United States Drug Enforcement Administration.
[6] The initial intent, similar to methods used to try to fight alcohol trafficking and use during the Prohibition era, was to use civil forfeitures as a weapon against drug kingpins.
[10]
According to journalist
Sarah Stillman, a major turning point in forfeiture activity was the passage of the
Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984.
[11] This law permitted local and federal law enforcement agencies to share the seized assets and cash.
[7] Civil forfeiture allowed federal and local governments to "extract swift penalties from white-collar criminals and offer restitution to victims of fraud", according to Stillman.
[7] From 1985 to 1993, authorities confiscated $3 billion of cash and other property based on the federal
Asset Forfeiture Program, which included both civil and criminal forfeitures.
[11] The methods were supported by the Reagan administration as a crime fighting strategy.
It's now possible for a drug dealer to serve time in a forfeiture-financed prison after being arrested by agents driving a forfeiture-provided automobile while working in a forfeiture-funded sting operation.
—
Reagan attorney general
Richkard Thornburgh in 1989.
[7]
The politics of civil forfeiture were somewhat unusual. The federal forfeiture laws were introduced and pushed through by Republicans in the 1980s, with support from some Democrats; but efforts to reform forfeiture laws have also come from the right,
[12] as libertarians in Congress have focused on the basic idea as offensive to property rights.
[12] In many areas civil forfeiture adversely affects persons from minorities and low-income communities, in which the typical seizure is less than $500, and Democrats have also been critical of civil forfeiture programs.
[12] The ACLU has also been a long time opponent.
[12]
