Civil forfeiture is a nationwide problem, and a first-of-its-kind survey by the Institute for Justice finds those who experience it call it frustrating, corrupt and unfair. Their stories highlight the human toll of policing for profit. IJ’s new survey focuses on victims of one large-scale forfeiture program, but the challenges they faced are common to forfeiture programs across the country. Study co-author Jennifer McDonald and senior attorney Dan Alban, both of IJ, will present findings from the survey and from IJ’s landmark forfeiture report, and discuss civil forfeiture more broadly.

Join us for an in-depth Supreme Court term review designed specifically for criminal defense attorneys. We examine significant decisions from the 2023 term, their implications, emerging trends in Supreme Court jurisprudence, and preview cases on the docket for the 2024 term.

Brief Amicus Curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Petitioner

Forfeiture reform letters of support from NACDL and its partners, and from others.

We, the undersigned organizations, write in opposition to S. 686, the “Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act,” or the “RESTRICT Act.” The RESTRICT Act aims at information and communications (ICTs) technologies like TikTok that are considered a threat to the United States. 

Part I: The Basics

According to the government, the goal of forfeiture is to take the profit out of crime. The government seeks to take private assets – including cash and real property – that it claims constitute the proceeds of criminal activity. Steven L. Kessler discusses some of the basics every attorney should know about forfeiture.

State and federal laws allow law enforcement agencies to seize the property of an individual who has not been charged with a crime.  This practice tears at the heart of justice and fairness in our system and turns the fundamental principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty on its head.

NACDL believes that asset forfeiture represents one of the most fundamental threats to the individual liberties of those accused of criminal activities as well as citizens not charged with any crime.  NACDL strongly encourages the reform of asset forfeiture laws.

Coalition letter to members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees regarding proposed reforms to federal forfeiture law.

Follow-up letter to the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure Advisory Committee on Civil Rules regarding the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000.

Letter to the U.S. Courts Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure Advisory Committee on Civil Rules regarding the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000.

Nation's Criminal Defense Bar Disappointed in Announcement of Regressive DOJ Policy on Asset Forfeiture -- Washington, DC (July 19, 2017) -- NACDL was disappointed in today's announcement by the Department of Justice that it is returning to ill-advised forfeiture policies that it had recently abandoned after much public scrutiny.

NACDL has proposed several technical statutory amendments to rectify the money laundering regime’s most serious flaws by simplifying and clarifying current law, facilitating compliance efforts by individuals and businesses, and by focusing federal law enforcement on serious misconduct. [Released August 2001]

Reports and other resources on forfeiture reform

Forfeiture Reform: Organizations & Websites

Forfeiture Reform: Federal Legislation Pending Federal Legislation S. 255 & H.R. 540 , The Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act of 2015 (FAIR Act) - The Fair Act amends the federal criminal code to increase the federal government's burden of proof in civil forfeiture proceedings to clear and c