Sens. Paul and Booker Introduce Bipartisan FAIR Act to Reform Civil Forfeiture Laws, Protect Americans’ Rights

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Rand Paul (R-KY) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) introduced the Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration (FAIR) Act to reform civil forfeiture laws and protect Americans’ rights from government abuse.

“The government should never have the power to seize a person’s property without due process. Yet, under current civil asset forfeiture laws, Americans are being stripped of their property without ever being charged or convicted of a crime. The FAIR Act directly addresses these injustices and is a critical step toward restoring fairness and accountability, protecting property owners’ rights, and curbing the weaponization of civil forfeiture laws once and for all,” said Dr. Paul.

“Civil asset forfeiture allows federal law enforcement to seize the property of Americans who haven’t even been charged with or convicted of a crime,” said Senator Booker. “Under this system, police can keep cash, cars, and even homes based on mere suspicion of a crime. These losses often become law enforcement’s profit because the burden is on the property owner to prove they should get their property back. Reforming federal civil asset forfeiture is long overdue and the FAIR Act will ensure due process and protect the public from unfair deprivations and forfeiture abuses.”

The latest version of the FAIR Act closely mirrors previous versions of the bill, with updates to reflect changes made by the House Judiciary Committee during a markup on June 14, 2023. The bill was favorably reported out of committee by a unanimous 26-0 vote, signaling broad bipartisan support and increasing the likelihood of legislative progress. In the Senate, the FAIR Act is currently cosponsored by Senators Mike Lee (R-UT), Angus King (I-ME), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD).

You can read the FAIR Act HERE.

The FAIR Act is also supported by:

“The Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act (FAIR Act) is vital legislation that seeks to restore fundamental constitutional protections by reforming the federal civil asset forfeiture process, a system that too often undermines trust in law enforcement and the rule of law. Civil asset forfeiture, in its current form, allows government agencies to seize property based on mere suspicion of its involvement in criminal activity—without charging or convicting the owner of a crime. This practice erodes public confidence in our justice system. By raising the evidentiary standard for seizures and providing better transparency and accountability, the Act helps ensure that the practice of asset forfeiture aligns with the Constitution and public expectations of justice. For these reasons, we are happy to support this legislative effort, and we applaud Sen. Rand Paul for his leadership. Restoring legitimacy and trust in law enforcement is not a partisan issue rather it is a shared priority for all who believe in the foundational principles of fairness and accountability,” said Jillian Snider, Policy Director for Criminal Justice and Civil Liberties at the R Street Institute...

Background:

Civil forfeiture laws present a threat to the rights of all property owners in the United States. These laws authorize the government to seize property based on the mere suspicion that it may be connected to criminal activity. No charges or conviction are required and, once property is seized, owners must navigate the confusing and expensive legal system to win it back. Worst of all, unlike criminal cases where the accused is afforded certain rights, such as the right to counsel, civil forfeiture cases are brought against the property itself and the government usually faces a lower evidentiary threshold, meaning the deck is stacked against the property owner.

By passing the Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration (FAIR) Act, Congress can decisively remedy this unjust system by providing strong due process protections to property owners.

The FAIR Act would:

• Eliminate “Equitable” Sharing: The “equitable” sharing program allows state law enforcement officers to turn seized property over to federal officials for forfeiture — and get up to 80% of the proceeds of the forfeited property. The FAIR Act ends “equitable” sharing and ensures that law enforcement cannot ignore state law.
• Remove the Profit Incentive: Law enforcement should be motivated by public safety, not financial rewards. The FAIR Act would restore the rule in which the proceeds of forfeiture go to the Treasury’s General Fund, where Congress can appropriate the money for any purpose.
• Restore Principle of “Innocent Until Proven Guilty”: Under current law, federal law enforcement agencies may take property suspected of involvement in crime without charging the property owner with a crime. The FAIR Act places on the government the burden to show that a property owner consented or was willfully blind to his property being used in a crime by a third party.
• Require Clear and Convincing Evidence: The FAIR Act would require that the government prove its case by the higher standard of clear and convincing evidence, instead of the current preponderance of the evidence standard that the property was used for an illegal purpose.
• Protect the Right to Counsel: Under current law, defendants receive appointed counsel due to indigency only if (1) they request it, and (2) their home has been seized. The FAIR Act would ensure that indigent owners can receive, at the discretion of the court, representation in civil forfeiture proceedings.
• Reform IRS Seizures: The FAIR Act requires that the IRS prove that the defendant knowingly deposited funds with criminal intent before they can seize the property. It also requires that a probable cause hearing be held no later than 14 days after the IRS seizes funds under the pretense of a structuring violation.
• Enact Strong Reporting Requirements: Requires the Attorney General to report on deposits made to the Treasury Fund, and that such report shall indicate the state, type of forfeiture, and provide details to specifically identify which funds were obtained from civil forfeiture and which funds were acquired from criminal forfeiture.
• Abolish Administrative Forfeitures: Administrative forfeitures happen automatically when property owners fail to challenge a seizure in court for any reason, including the inability to afford a lawyer or a missed deadline to file a claim. The seized property is simply presumed “guilty” without a neutral arbiter such as a judge determining whether it should be permanently taken from its owner. According to the Institute for Justice, administrative forfeitures account for 88 percent of all forfeitures. This provision would effectively force the government to go to court to keep property it has seized.