HB19: Reforming Civil Asset Forfeiture

This Bill passed the House 58-10, but did not reach the Senate floor for a vote.

Libertas Institute supports this bill.

Several years ago, the Attorney General’s office, Statewide Association of Prosecutors, and the Utah Chiefs of Police Association conspired to deceive the legislature into passing a bill that reformed civil asset forfeiture. The sponsors of the bill told their colleagues it was nothing more than “recodification” (a re-arranging of law, with no substantive changes) while knowing that it in fact contained several key provisions that eroded property rights and due process, making it easier for the government to take ownership of property.

Civil asset forfeiture, put simply, is the ability of government to permanently take property from a person who hasn’t necessarily been charged with—let alone convicted of—a crime.

While this deception was uncovered by Libertas Institute, and largely overturned a year later (despite significant opposition from the Attorney General’s office), much more reform is needed.

Representative Brian Greene sponsored legislation in the 2016 session to reform forfeiture and impose reasonable controls to ensure that innocent people could quickly recover their property (or avoid it being taken in the first place). That bill was attacked by law enforcement executives in Utah County and around the state, who issued a letter containing significant misrepresentations and inaccuracies about what the bill would have accomplished. The bill passed the House by a large margin, but didn’t make it out of the Senate committee.

This year’s reform effort is already being opposed by the same groups.

While House Bill 19 contains a number of changes to forfeiture law, the primary proposal is to require a criminal conviction for civil forfeiture to proceed. If enacted into law, any civil forfeiture that is contested would require prosecutors to first charge and convict the alleged perpetrator before the civil forfeiture can proceed. This would help ensure justice is served by requiring prosecutors to prove guilt where innocence must first be presumed.

Around the country, states have been reforming—and in some cases, outright repealing—civil asset forfeiture. Utah once had the chance to lead on this issue but because of the taxpayer-funded lobbyist efforts of the state’s police and prosecutorial community, the reform effort has taken longer. But it’s coming—and it’s supposedly by the public. A poll conducted earlier this year revealed that 86% of Utah voters oppose the practice; a national poll conducted recently found that 84% of American voters oppose it as well.

Curious to learn more on this issue? Read our recent public policy brief on civil asset forfeiture.