But not all of the money seized was gotten illegally. In fact noone except MU knows that for sure at the moment, but what we can be sure of, is that the amount is less than 100%.
In the robbed bank case, you know exactly how much was stolen and you can prove it, so seize the $100,000 - but should you seize his car and house too, before he has even been tried?
If the man is a career thief, then yes they should seize his car and house too.
The point is that when someone is a "career criminal", everything they own is in one way or another traceable to crime.
If I rob a bank and use the money to buy a Dominoes franchise, and then use the money I make off of that to buy a house. It's all ill gotten gains.
The reason the feds seize everything, is because they may have to trace your entire fiscal history to find out where money went and came from.
What happens if you owned your house for 5 years, and then started using criminal gains to pay your mortgage for the next 10. What happens when ~20% of your house is criminal gains? Do the feds get to come take your garage, or you guest suite? What about your cars new transmission, do they get to just rip that off the vehicle?
Once the ill-gotten gains are reinvested, they become dilute. Other people get involved.
If it was a civil matter, the plaintiff could go after your stuff Until They Got Their Money Back. Then they have to stop.
For criminal cases, the 'take everything that's tainted' smacks of punishment, not justice. And with other people involved (parents, children, spouse) it can be cruel.
In the robbed bank case, you know exactly how much was stolen and you can prove it, so seize the $100,000 - but should you seize his car and house too, before he has even been tried?