Policing For Profit: The Case Against Civil Asset Forfeiture

BusinessPolicyPolicing For Profit: The Case Against Civil Asset ForfeitureSteve Forbes lays out why civil asset forfeiture should be abolished or, at minimum, require what justice has always demanded: conviction first.BySteve Forbes,Forbes Staff. “With all thy getting, get understanding."Follow AuthorFeb 25, 2026, 06:00am ESTWoman's vehicle being towed away under civil assets forfeiture law.Getty ImagesCivil asset forfeiture—the legal practice of allowing government to seize property suspected of being used or involved in the commitment of a crime—represents one of the most troubling erosions of due process in American law. Despite its stated purpose of disrupting criminal enterprises, the practice has metastasized into a system that punishes the innocent, enriches law enforcement agencies and ignores the foundational presumption that citizens are innocent until proven guilty.The injustice is structural. Because seizures are typically civil proceedings brought against the property itself rather than its owner, individuals lose standard criminal protections: no right to appointed counsel, a lower burden of proof, and owners having to spend more money fighting for their property in court than the seized property is worth, which in many instances is a few hundred dollars. This isn’t a bug in the system; for many agencies, it’s the point. Forty-three states allow police and prosecutors to keep between 50% and 100% of seized assets.Real cases illustrate the human cost. Motel owner Russ Caswell nearly lost his family's Tewksbury, Massachusetts motel—worth more than $1 million and owned debt-free for decades.

The Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), argued that drug transactions had occurred on the property, despite Caswell’s having no involvement whatsoever. In another case, brothers Jeff and James Hirsch had $100,000 seized from their small candy business by the IRS, not because they were accused of any crime but because they made frequent cash deposits of less than $10,000. The government called this pattern “structuring,” even though the brothers were simply following their bank’s advice. The money was eventually returned after public outcry, but only after the brothers experienced months of financial hardship.Perhaps most damning is what forfeiture does to law enforcement itself. When agencies are permitted to keep seized assets, the incentive to seize becomes financial rather than investigative.

The Philadelphia District Attorney's office took in tens of millions of dollars in forfeiture revenue over roughly a decade, seizing homes from families over minor drug offenses that involved their children. One example, the Sourovelis family had their home taken after their son was caught with $40 worth of heroin. They had no idea the seizure was coming and were given no chance to respond before losing their house. 1/1 Skip Ad Continue watchingafter the adVisit Advertiser websiteGO TO PAGEThese aren’t isolated failures. They are predictable outcomes in a system designed without adequate checks. The Institute for Justice, a nonprofit, public interest law firm dedicated to fighting government abuses, has long been battling this unAmerican practice. It recently cited a Texas case in which police seized a couple’s life savings based on a suspected connection to drugs. No drugs were found, no arrests were made, and no charges were filed. But it took years of effort for the couple to win a court decision to get their money back. And even with that, government authorities are dragging their feet on returning the money.Several states, including New Mexico and North Carolina, have meaningfully reformed or abolished civil asset forfeiture by requiring a criminal conviction before property can be permanently seized. The results haven’t been the law enforcement catastrophe critics predicted; they’ve simply been fairer. But, unfortunately, the federal government has something called The Equity Sharing Program, in which if local police can partner with a federal agency they can circumvent state restrictions and keep 80% of the forfeited proceeds.A government that can take your property before proving you did anything wrong has too much power. Yet the Supreme Court has thus far punted on putting the kibosh on this flagrant abuse, as has Congress. Civil asset forfeiture should be abolished or, at a minimum, require what justice has always demanded: a conviction first. Video unavailableGot a tip? Share confidential information with Forbes.Editorial StandardsReprints & PermissionsBySteve ForbesSteve Forbes is Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of Forbes Media. Steve’s newest project is the podcast “What’s Ahead,” where he engages the world’s top newsmakers, politicians and pioneers in business and economics in honest conversations meant to challenge traditional conventions as well as featuring Steve’s signature views on the intersection of society, economic and policy. Steve helped create the recently released and highly acclaimed public television documentary, In Money We Trust?, which was produced under the auspices of Maryland Public television. The film was inspired by the book he co-authored, Money: How the Destruction of the Dollar Threatens the Global Economy – and What We Can Do About It. Steve’s latest book is Reviving America: How Repealing Obamacare, Replacing the Tax Code and Reforming The Fed will Restore Hope and Prosperity co-authored by Elizabeth Ames (McGraw-Hill Professional). Steve writes editorials for each issue of Forbes under the heading of “Fact and Comment.” A widely respected economic prognosticator, he is the only writer to have won the highly prestigious Crystal Owl Award four times. The prize was formerly given by U.S. Steel Corporation to the financial journalist whose economic forecasts for the coming year proved most accurate. In both 1996 and 2000, Steve campaigned vigorously for the Republican nomination for the Presidency. Key to his platform were a flat tax, medical savings accounts, a new Social Security system for working Americans, parental choice of schools for their children, term limits and a strong national defense. Steve continues to energetically promote this agenda.Read MoreFind Steve Forbes on Facebook and X.