New Report Nations Largest Forfeiture Program Fails To Fight Crime

by | Jun 17, 2019

New Report Nations Largest Forfeiture Program Fails To Fight Crime

by | Jun 17, 2019

A new Institute for Justice study (PDF) finds the nation’s largest forfeiture program does not help police fight crime. Instead, the study indicates police use forfeiture to boost revenue—in other words, to police for profit. The IJ study, “Fighting Crime or Raising Revenue? Testing Opposing Views of Forfeiture,” combines local crime, drug use and economic data from a variety of federal sources with more than a decade’s worth of data from the Department of Justice’s equitable sharing program. Equitable sharing lets state and local law enforcement cooperate with the Drug Enforcement Administration and other DOJ agencies on forfeiture cases and receive up to 80% of the proceeds.

The study—the most extensive and sophisticated of its kind—calls into question whether distributing billions of dollars in forfeiture proceeds improves police effectiveness. The new evidence undercuts claims by prominent forfeiture supporters, such as former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who called forfeiture an “important tool that can be used to combat crime, particularly drug abuse,” and Attorney General William Barr, who, while acknowledging “problems and potential abuses,” called forfeiture “a valuable tool in law enforcement.”

Specifically, the study finds:

Read the rest at ij.org.

Our Books

Recent Articles

Recent

Supreme Court Ends Federal War on Gun-Owning Potheads

Supreme Court Ends Federal War on Gun-Owning Potheads

Yesterday, the Supreme Court unanimously struck down a pretext that the feds have used to nullify the constitutional rights of more than fifty million Americans. The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibited gun ownership by anyone who is "an unlawful user of or addicted to...

read more
Strategic Ambiguity (If We Must)

Strategic Ambiguity (If We Must)

In recent years, critics on both sides of the aisle have taken aim at the longstanding policy of strategic ambiguity toward Taiwan. They argue that Washington should abandon ambiguity and embrace “strategic clarity,” explicitly pledging to fight China over Taiwan....

read more

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This