Legislative Reforms

Legislative Goals

End Civil Forfeiture

Civil forfeiture laws turn the presumption of innocence on its head and allow people to be punished for alleged crimes without necessarily being convicted of any crime. Civil forfeiture should be replaced with criminal forfeiture so that a person’s property can only be forfeited after they have been convicted of a crime related to that property.

See which states have Ended Civil Forfeiture

Eliminate the Profit Incentive

More than 40 states and the federal government allow forfeiture proceeds to flow to law enforcement coffers, creating an incentive to seize and forfeit as much property as possible. But police and prosecutors should be pursuing justice, not profit. Both the state and federal governments should amend their civil forfeiture statutes to require that all civil forfeiture proceeds be deposited either into the state’s general treasury or into an account dedicated to education or compensating crime victims.

See which states have eliminated the Profit Incentive

Shift the Innocent-Owner Burden to the Government

If a person’s property is seized because someone else did something wrong, the innocent owner is often required to prove a negative to recover their property: For some or all types of property, 31 states and the federal government require innocent-owner claimants to prove they neither knew about nor should have known about the criminal use of their property. In the other 19 states and the District of Columbia, the innocent-owner burden is always where it should be—on the government.

See which states require the government to always bear the burden of proof for innocent-owner claims

Close the Equitable Sharing loophole

Some states have enacted civil forfeiture reforms that, for instance, block law enforcement agencies from keeping forfeited property for their own use. But by using a controversial tool called “equitable sharing,” police and prosecutors can circumvent those reforms by handing over forfeiture cases to the federal government, which in turn lets police and prosecutors keep up to 80% of the proceeds from whatever it forfeits. To prevent these end runs, 10 states have passed anti-circumvention legislation to tighten the equitable sharing loophole, while New Mexico and the District of Columbia have completely closed it. And to ensure that the federal government respects the states’ wishes, federal law should require the government to distribute equitable sharing proceeds in the same manner as required by state law. 

see which states have tightened or closed the loophole

Our Results:

Civil Forfeiture Reforms

Today, three states have abolished civil forfeiture outright, while a fourth only permits it for racketeering cases. Since 2014, 39 states and the District of Columbia have enacted reforms.

read more

State Reform Efforts

Click on the State to learn more about Civil Forfeiture Legislation in the state.

Reform Passed Reform Pending

Legislative Highlights for Civil Forfeiture

Ended civil forfeiture and only use criminal forfeiture
Eliminated the Profit Incentive
Require the government to always bear the burden of proof for innocent-owner claims
Tightened or Closed the equitable sharing loophole

Model Legislation

Model Criminal Forfeiture Process Act

Replacing Civil Forfeiture and Ending Policing for Profit

  • Civil forfeiture is a serious assault by government on cars, cash and other property.
  • IJ enlisted prosecutors and defense attorneys to draft a model criminal forfeiture process act that state legislators and governors can enact in full or in part.
  • The model eliminates civil forfeiture and replaces it with criminal forfeiture. It also ends the financial incentive in criminal forfeiture. 
  • This model is an important component to ensure that every American and his property are safe from government abuse.
learn more

Model Seizure and Reporting Act

Providing Data to State Legislators to Monitor Forfeiture

  • Civil forfeiture is one of the greatest threats to property rights in the nation. 
  • Forfeitures often supplement police budgets
  • State legislators should demand transparency. IJ’s model seizure and forfeiture reporting act is the first step.
  • It provides legislators with the information necessary to check members of the executive branch who seize and forfeit property.
learn more

Model Anti-Circumvention Forfeiture Act

Protecting State Sovereignty from Federal Overreach

  • Some states have acted to rein in civil forfeiture, but a loophole exists: the controversial federal “equitable sharing” program. 
  • Using equitable sharing, state and local agencies can partner with federal agencies to forfeit property under permissive federal laws and receive a cut of the proceeds.  
  • IJ has drafted a model anti-circumvention forfeiture act for state legislators to protect property owners from this abusive program. 
learn more

Federal Legislatative Resources

Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act

2026
2025
2023
2021
2019

DUE PROCESS Act of 2019

Background Materials

Congressional Testimony

June 6, 2023

kirby west

House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government

December 8, 2021

Dan Alban

House Committee on Oversight and Reform Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Subcommittee

May 24, 2016

Robert Everett Johnson

House Ways and Means Committee Subcommittee on Oversight

May 24, 2016

Randy Sowers

House Ways and Means Committee Subcommittee on Oversight

April 15, 2015

Darpana Sheth

Senate Judiciary Committee

April 15, 2015

Russ Caswell

Senate Judiciary Committee

February 11, 2015

Robert Everett Johnson

House Ways and Means Committee Subcommittee on Oversight

February 11, 2015

Jeff Hirsch

House Ways and Means Committee Subcommittee on Oversight

February 11, 2015

Darpana Sheth

House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations

Our Goal:

End Civil Forfeiture

We are the Institute for Justice, a non-profit civil liberties law firm that defends private property rights across the country.

The Institute for Justice aims to curtail, and ultimately, abolish civil forfeiture, one of the gravest abuses of power in the country today. IJ has filed more than two dozen cases challenging civil forfeiture nationwide. In 2019, IJ secured a landmark victory at the U.S. Supreme Court when it ruled unanimously in Timbs v. Indiana that the Eight Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause protects Americans against state and local forfeitures. 

support ij