Officials Want New Forfeiture Bill
By CASSANDRA BURRELL, AP
WASHINGTON (AP), A House bill that would restrict the government's power to
confiscate private property would undermine law enforcement's ability to fight crime, top
law enforcement officials say.
Officials of the Justice Department, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the
U.S. Customs Service told a Senate subcommittee they supported a more modest plan proposed
by the Clinton administration.
The Justice Department supports tightening the rules the federal government must
follow to seize cars, cash, homes or other property linked to crime, Deputy Attorney
General Eric Holder told senators Wednesday. But a bill the House passed 375-48 last month
``crosses the line between providing due process and giving unintended relief to drug
dealers, money launderers and other criminals who victimize the elderly and the vulnerable
in our society,'' he said.
``There is legislation pending before the Congress which will, quite simply,
undercut the ability of law enforcement to forfeit illegally gained property or property
used to facilitate a crime, from drug dealers, terrorists, alien smugglers and other
criminals,'' said Richard Fiano, the Drug Enforcement Administration's chief of
operations.
Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., the bill's author and chairman of the House Judiciary
Committee, defended it as an effort to rid the legal system of a practice too vulnerable
to abuse. The law shouldn't allow police to seize property simply because they suspect it
was involved in wrongdoing, he said.
Too many innocent people have been deprived of their cash or possessions without
due process, he said.
``There are some issues that really get to you, and this is one,'' he said. ``I
think if you're a drug dealer and you're guilty, not just accused, but you're guilty, that
you ought to lose your house, your car and your shoes and socks. But when you're not
guilty, ... I don't want my country confiscating property.'' Police have used civil asset
forfeiture to seize homes to shut down drug operations quickly even before charges are
filed. Investigators also have seized boats, cash and other assets from suspected
drug dealers in hopes of driving them out of businesses. Hyde faced skepticism from
several subcommittee members. There should be a way to strike a better balance between the
rights of property owners and the needs of law enforcement, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.,
said.
``Forfeiture is about the government using its powers to take private property,
and there must be adequate restrictions to prevent abuse of this power,'' said Sen. Strom
Thurmond, R-S.C. But the bill passed by the House ``may undermine the use of forfeiture
law in the war against drugs, child pornography, money laundering, telemarketing fraud,
terrorism and a host of other crimes,'' Thurmond said.
Hyde criticized the Clinton administration's alternative plan, saying it would
increase the government's power to seize property, not curb it.
Under the Hyde bill, the federal government would have to prove with ``clear and
convincing'' evidence that the property was eligible for forfeiture if an owner files a
legal challenge.
The administration's plan recommends a lower standard of proof, a
``preponderance'' of the evidence, which is standard in civil cases. Current law requires
property owners to prove they are not connected with the alleged crime.
The administration also believes Hyde's bill would require the release of cash,
vehicles and other property to owners demonstrating a ``hardship,'' pending a trial even
when there is compelling evidence that the property was used in a crime.
The bill is H.R. 1658.
