The Institute for Justice’s flagship forfeiture report, Policing for Profit, grades the civil forfeiture laws of each state and the federal government and demonstrates how financial incentives to seize property, in combination with weak protections for property owners, put people’s property at risk. IJ has also published reports exposing the injustices with federal civil forfeiture programs, including “equitable sharing” and IRS “structuring” seizures.
Policing for Profit 4
The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture
MARCH 2026
By Lisa Knepper, Jason Tiezzi, Matthew P. West, Ph.D., Elyse Pohl and Mindy Menjou
Scholars and advocates have long warned that civil forfeiture’s low burden of proof and financial incentives encourage the pursuit of property over justice. This edition of Policing for Profit adds a new and troubling dimension: Meaningful judicial oversight—the core safeguard against government abuse—is often absent. That absence magnifies the risk to innocent owners while offering little or no benefit to public safety.
Do Americans support Forfeiture?
Do you support or oppose civil forfeiture?
As you may or may not know, “civil forfeiture” allows law enforcement officials to seize cash, cars, or other property if they suspect it is involved in a crime, even if the property owner has not been convicted or charged with a crime. Given this, to what extent do you support or oppose “civil forfeiture?”
- 8% – Strongly support
- 17% – Somewhat support
- 23% – Somewhat oppose
- 36% – Strongly oppose
- 15% – No opinion
Do you support or oppose allowing law enforcement agencies to use forfeited property or its proceeds?
Federal law allows law enforcement agencies to keep 100 percent of proceeds from property that has been forfeited. To what extent do you support or oppose allowing law enforcement agencies to use forfeited property or its proceeds for their own use?
- 7% – Strongly support
- 16% – Somewhat support
- 19% – Somewhat oppose
- 44% – Strongly oppose
- 15% – Don’t Know/No opinion
Do you support or oppose allowing law enforcement agencies to use forfeited property or its proceeds?
States like Minnesota and others have recently passed laws limiting the use of civil forfeiture, but legislators left in place a provision allowing local law enforcement to work with federal officials to bypass the tougher state law. Once federal prosecutors forfeit the property, they give 80 percent back to the local officials. Do you agree that state law enforcement officials should be allowed to participate in and benefit from forfeitures that are not permitted under state law?
- 7% – Strongly agree
- 23% – Somewhat agree
- 28% – Somewhat disagree
- 41% – Strongly disagree
IJ’s Civil Forfeiture Research
-
Arizona’s Profit Incentive in Civil Forfeiture: Dangerous for law enforcement; Dangerous for Arizonans
Arizona law enforcement’s forfeiture revenue grew almost 400 percent from 2000 to 2011, with the largest share of proceeds spent on salaries and benefits.
-
Rotten Reporting in the Peach State: Civil Forfeiture in Georgia Leaves the Public in the Dark
Georgia law enforcement agencies routinely fail to publicly report their forfeiture activities, despite a state law and a successful lawsuit requiring disclosure.
-
Forfeiting Justice: How Texas Police and Prosecutors Cash In On Seized Property
From 2001 to 2007, Texas law enforcement’s take from forfeited property tripled—and nearly a quarter was spent on salaries and overtime.
-
A Stacked Deck: How Minnesota’s Civil Forfeiture Laws Put Citizens’ Property at Risk
From 2003 to 2010, forfeiture revenue in Minnesota jumped 75 percent, even as crime rates declined, and the average value of forfeited property was only $1,000.
-
Inequitable Justice: How Federal “Equitable Sharing” Encourages Local Police and Prosecutors to Evade State Civil Forfeiture Law for Financial Gain
Federal laws encourage local law enforcement to skirt state property rights protections to cash in on seized property.
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.