Enacts the "criminal forfeiture process act"; repealer

• Democratic7

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Jamaal Bailey says this is needed

Originally intended to undermine the proceeds of criminal enterprises, civil asset forfeiture has led to perverse incentives by police depart- ments and abuse across the nation. Because of the lack of due process involved, the necessary bar for goods or money to be confiscated is incredibly low. In many municipalities across the country, departments often use forfeited money and assets to increase policing budgets. Low- income communities and communities of color are disproportionately impacted because they do not have the means to pay for the litigation necessary to recover their assets. Often an individual will never be charged with a criminal offense after goods are stolen, but it is still their responsibility to make the case that the assets were not involved in a crime. Many municipalities have used fines, fees and asset forfeiture to fill revenue gaps. These practices are regressive and have the most harmful impact on economically vulnerable residents. This legislation ensures due process in asset forfeiture and removes harmful incentives to confiscate assets unlawfully, while also leaving this law enforcement tool available when it is truly needed. Reform to asset forfeiture is long overdue, and converting civil asset forfeiture to criminal forfei- ture processing ensures due process and fairness. PRIOR LEGISLATD HISTORY: 2021-22: S6440 - Reported to Finance 2023-24: S2192 - Reported and Committed to Finance

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.