Criminal and Civil Forfeiture Abuses

U.S. Constitution:
Amendment V
No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VIII
... excessive fines [shall not be] imposed....

In the 20th century there has emerged a pernicious practice of public officials abusively seizing and forfeiting assets from private parties in ways that are inconsistent with the Constitution. There are two ways that is done:

• Criminal asset forfeiture. An individual is convicted of a crime, but instead of imposing and collecting a definite fine established by law, returning any surplus from a public sale, law enforecment authorities seize and forfeit everything they can find that he either owns, possesses, or has used, including assets belonging to innocent third parties, usually far in excess of what a statutory fine would be for the offense.
• Civil asset forfeiture. An individual is not convicted of a crime, but on an allegation that he might have committed a crime, law enforecment authorities seize and forfeit everything they can find that he either owns, possesses or has used, on the grounds that such assets must be the proceeds of criminal activity, and force him to prove his innocence, usually at great expense, or even seize and forfeit assets belonging to an innocent third partiy, forcing him to prove his sole ownershiip and that he has no connection with the alleged criminal activoity.

Legislation, testimony

•   Report of Jon Roland in support of Texas HB 3171, restraining civil asset forfeiture, but urging amendments, 2015