Trump is Wrong on Civil Forfeiture

State should stop this end-run around the Constitution

In a meeting between the new president and law enforcement officials, a Texas sheriff complained about legislation that would require a person be convicted of a crime before the state took ownership of his or her property. President Donald Trump, wrongly, disparaged legislators who support this reform to the forfeiture system.

Politico notes the exchange:

“On asset forfeiture, we’ve got a state senator in Texas that was talking about introducing legislation to require conviction before we could receive that forfeiture money,” [Sheriff Harold] Eavenson said.

“Can you believe that?” Trump interjected.

“And I told him that the cartel would build a monument to him in Mexico if he could get that legislation passed,” the Texas sheriff continued.

“Who is the state senator? Do you want to give his name? We’ll destroy his career,” Trump replied.

Forfeiture is the process by which the government transfers assets from people to the state. There are two types: criminal and civil. Criminal forfeiture is done after a conviction; civil can be done without a conviction and often without any charges being filed. Criminal forfeiture is a needed and necessary part of law enforcement. Civil forfeiture is an end-run around constitutional rights and should be abolished.

In Michigan, the fact that innocent people are losing their property to the state has been a big problem. But the move toward a solution has been bipartisan, with bills passed in 2015 and 2016 reforming state laws. The Legislature should take the final step and eliminate civil forfeiture altogether, replacing it with only criminal forfeiture.

Stay Engaged

Receive our weekly emails!

Related Articles:

Michigan Should End Civil Asset Forfeiture

Michigan Forfeiture Laws Improving, But State Transparency Still Falls Behind

Key Part of Civil Asset Forfeiture Law Ruled Unconstitutional

Michigan Must Stop Keeping Peoples’ Property Without Conviction

Justice Clarence Thomas Takes a Broadside at Civil Forfeiture

Michigan Needs To Stop Charging Residents To Get Their Property Back

Stay Engaged

Simply enter your email below to receive our weekly email:


There aren’t many policies that get near unanimous support from economists, but free trade is one of them. Despite this, a central theme of the 2016 presidential campaign, heard from both political parties, was that free trade was somehow harmful to the United States and corrective action was needed. Mark Perry, an economics professor at the University of Michigan-Flint and scholar with the American Enterprise Institute, makes the case for why President Trump’s assessment of free trade is misguided.

Related Sites