
Jeff Sessions Announces Justice Department Will Increase Asset Forfeiture - csomar
http://reason.com/blog/2017/07/17/sessions-announces-justice-department-wi
======
mrleiter
Capitalism works because there is an elected authority, the U.S. Governement,
that guarantees its citizens their right to own property. Property is one of
the fundamental pillars of Western society. Under certain formal processes,
property can be taken away (without the consent of the owner). The motivation
behind such drastic actions is to balance out economic interests of the
involved parties, e.g. in lien those of debtor vs creditor. Or when the
government needs to build a road and a land owner is unwillig to sell, there
must be a fair process, which must balance the need of the public as well.

So, now, asset forfeiture can be a useful tool to undermine criminal activity
(or any activity really) of a specific person. But this must happen in a fair
trial (unless danger is imminent, under which one can argue in favor of
indemnity). In this case there hasn't even been a charge brought forward. This
alone is executive abuse of power, because a independent judicial system must
only be allowed to take such actions.

Moreover, this will hit economically weak peak people hardest. Which further
increases crime. It's a vicious circle.

~~~
abhi3
Not an American but reading all the outrage gives me the impression that
police in US is just going around seizing a couple of thousand dollars from
anyone they can find to fill up their budget and hope no one will go to court
because it'd be more expensive for the accused to hire a lawyer. Nevermind
that contingency fee arrangments are widespread and that small amounts of
cash, even to the extent of a few tens of thousand dollars can easily be
proved as legitimate money if one has a job. Not familiar with US civil
procedure but it should involve showing your tax returns and asking for a
summary judgment, and later a tort lawsuit against the State for all the
suffering caused. I would be interested in knowing the median amount seized by
police in such cases. Maybe its just a case of politicians one after another
not being ideologues about property right but recognizing the merits of
adopting a pragmatist approach to augment law enforcement budget by seizing
large amounts of obviously ill gotten wealth without having to discharge a
high (and expensive) burden of proof in each case. If so, sounds good to me.

~~~
arjuan
If you want additional perspective on how it's actually used, then checkout
John Oliver's segment on Civil Forfeiture.

------
snsr
This practice (brought back to life by Reagan's "Comprehensive Crime Control
Act of 1984") is not only unjust but unconstitutional at face value.

The cynicism required to double down on this practice is a new low for
Sessions, something I didn't think was possible.

------
sbuttgereit
While I appreciate that it is in vogue to bash Trump & Co. (Largely justified
I would agree), we would be mistaken to couch this as something new or some
difference between the mainstream political parties. Sessions predecessor had
no problem with asset forfeiture either:
[https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-04-11/obamas-
do...](https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-04-11/obamas-doj-sets-
back-justice-with-asset-forfeiture-program)

~~~
rndmize
There's a difference between "no problem with" and "actively encouraging".
It's similar to how the millions of people we now have in prison as a result
of three strikes laws and heavy drug enforcement that was popular politically
in the 80s and 90s has come to be seen as a bad and ineffective thing - and
yet a few months ago Sessions released a statement saying the DOJ recommended
pursuing maximum sentencing.

> Sessions also formally withdrew a signature part of Attorney General Eric
> Holder's "Smart on Crime" initiative, which sought to target the most
> serious crimes and reduce the number of defendants charged with non-violent
> drug offenses that would otherwise trigger mandatory minimum sentences.

[http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/12/politics/sessions-criminal-
cha...](http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/12/politics/sessions-criminal-charging-
memo/index.html)

Without even considering the rest of the Trump administration, Sessions is
taking this country backwards and encouraging policies we already know don't
work.

~~~
sbuttgereit
In the US News article I posted, AG Lynch was actively encouraging the
practice by reviving the equitable sharing program. A program designed to be
sure those that collect the loot get their cut. My informal turn of phrase
notwithstanding, the so-called progressives are just as regressive on this
issue add their conservative counterparts.

------
DenisM
Justice Thomas indicated he will vote to strike down the law should the case
be brought before him. With him having said that soon enough a lawyer will
appear to argue the case, this practice will not last.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-
conspiracy/wp/201...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-
conspiracy/wp/2017/03/06/justice-thomas-sharply-criticizes-civil-forfeiture-
laws/?utm_term=.3ca89de8853b)

------
meddlepal
Government in this country is completely off the rails insane. At least ten-
fifteen, heck twenty years ago you could sort of understand why certain policy
decisions were made... nowadays it is like completely impossible to figure out
what people in power are trying to actually accomplish.

~~~
Finnucane
Really? It doesn't seem that hard to understand what motivates Jeff Sessions--
filling up private prisons and using police to terrorize poor and minority
communities.

~~~
sremani
The nickname for (former AG under Obama) Loretta Lynch was Queen of
Forfeiture, and has a body of work reflecting this when she was working in
Brooklyn. It would be insane to think that civil forfeiture was not a problem
the past 8 years.

~~~
specializeded
Not a single person in this entire thread has claimed it wasn’t a problem the
last 8 years.

Be better.

~~~
wernercd
But there are quite a few people losing their minds now that the "other side"
is continuing to do what's been done for years.

Forfeiture, bombing the Middle East, travel bans, etc

So much stuff the current Administration is doing that the last Administration
did...

and NOW people are losing their shit.

Just a bit questionable for a large part of the conversation to be started
now, eh?

~~~
specializeded
The travel “bans” are not equivalent, first off.

Second, try using Reddit’s search function or Google’s trends app to see just
how _devastatingly_ demonstrably wrong your claims about interest in bombing
the Middle East or civil asset forfeiture are.

Sort of looks like _you’re_ the only one who’s just now giving a shit, eh?

~~~
wernercd
The Travel Bans are re-markedly similar... based on a list of countries by the
previous Administration.

Bombing the Middle East broke all records during the last Administration...
not that this one won't continue to break records, but we were at war for the
entire previous Administration and will probably remain so for this one...

I know of many cases of CAF during the previous Administration. I'm sad that
the current administration doesn't seem to be restoring law and order to the
degree I had hoped they would.

I've given a shit for a long time. I live in a heavily one-sided state and I
sit on the other side - so, for the most part, my vote doesn't matter.

What DOES matter is that the stuff people are RAGING MAD!!!! about is stuff
that, for a large part, is no different from before. You can nit-pick over
minor differences between Travel bans... but there was NO care about those
bans for the 8 years prior.

My main point here... is people pick a team... and then lose their shit when
their team loses. What's important isn't the Travel Ban (or whatever). Whats
important is the "Other Guy's Quarterback" is calling the plays. Even if they
are the same plays "My Quarterback" would have chosen - or has chosen
repeatedly - NOW we are going to "resist".

The hypocrisy is maddening - from both "sides".

------
forgottenacc57
Can I say this? What a fucked up country.

~~~
geff82
What you currently see, and I find it dramatic: the anglo-saxon world is in
decline. Canada, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand might be alive and
kicking, but they represent only a minority of people in the anglo-saxon
world.

This decline shows itself in people like Trump or the Brexit.

~~~
mythrwy
Perhaps Trump and Brexit are (likely misguided) attempts to stop the decline
rather than the actual decline itself?

~~~
geff82
Ok, not joking now. What Britain and USA are currently doing is giving up
power. They have so much internal conflicts that somehow people feel getting
on their own will help them. But giving up power rarely made a nation larger
and stronger. So they are declining. USA could have been the master of TPP or
TTIP, or create some Euro-American superstructure in rememberance of our
common roots. They could have been the leader of many things. But instead they
just leave and go away. No negocitations. The world will not stop, it will go
on, everything else is hallucination. The Chinese are ready to fill the void,
and Europe is already bonding with them now that the US don't seem to be
interested in anything constructive. So there is no stopping the decline. It
is in full speed and it will lead to ugly situations. And as someone who
loves(d) the US, this is a pity to me.

~~~
mythrwy
Well to be fair some people blame the decline on an increase in minorities and
pot smoking hipsters. But I'm generally skeptical of "reasons" because people
seem to want always blame everyone else.

Besides, I think the "decline" is a bit overstated. America isn't going
anywhere. Things start getting tough and the guns will come out and they have
a lot of those. Besides maybe Anglo Saxons shouldn't rule the whole world. And
really nothing lasts forever. China might supplant the west as global leader,
this was predicted I think two centuries ago, but it won't happen for a while.

------
cleansy
Soon you have to consider Asset Forfeiture as a 'hidden' tax on the economy.
Same when 'revolutionary forces' condemn land from farmers or dictators disown
factory owners.

~~~
aaronchall
This is a good point, and I don't think we see enough economics perspective on
this subject.

The problem is that "Asset Forfeiture" appears to work in making drug dealing
(and other black market criminal activities) a much more risky business.

The question is how do we balance something that works with restoring property
to law-abiding citizens when police make a mistake?

There seems to be little to no process around this.

There will be resistance to installing processes because criminals will use it
to reclaim their dirty money and more process will cost time and money, making
forfeiture less effective.

~~~
syshum
>>The problem is that "Asset Forfeiture" appears to work in making drug
dealing (and other black market criminal activities) a much more risky
business.

Citation, I have read alot of reports and studies on this subject none of them
support our position

------
Crontab
Sessions is so out of touch it's insane.

------
Overtonwindow
I only hope this increase will lead to the increase in lawsuits, and judicial
review of this awful practice.

------
thebiglebrewski
Jeff Sessions is like an evil caricature of what an Attorney General should
be. I hope this whole administration goes down and soon. The war on drugs
failed decades ago, let's focus on rehabilitation and getting people back to
society and things to be excited about instead of drugs (but wait, that
problem is so much harder to solve!)

On a trip to Montreal this weekend I seriously considered just staying...

~~~
scurvy
I don't like Mr. Sessions, nor do I like asset forfeiture, but I'd like to
know more about the efficacy of rehab before heading down that path. I asked
for some stats about rehab in the recent opioid epidemic thread, but I didn't
receive any. Even as everyone threw forward ideas about free state sponsored
heroin and rehab programs.

I really would like to see some stats before forming an opinion on emotions
alone. After all, it was emotions that landed us here.

Some people just don't want to rejoin society. Why choose life when you've got
heroin? Pretty sure that rehab doesn't have a good success rate in those
situations.

~~~
allwein
>Why choose life when you've got heroin?

Heroin abuse is in the extreme minority when it comes to opioid abuse. You
need to get rid of the image in your head of the strung-out heroin addict
lazing about in a grubby drug den. A majority of the opioid epidemic these
days is actually from prescription opioids like Oxycontin , Vicodin, and
similar drugs. So there's plenty of high functioning blue and white collar
opioid addicts out there with plenty to lose.

~~~
buttcoinslol
The only difference between heroin and oxycontin is oxycontin is more
expensive. The effect is identical. Most opiate addicts that can get heroin do
it because it's a fraction of the cost.

