SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
AlterNet reports New Mexico Ends "Policing for Profit"
In a historic move, New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez (R) [on April 10] signed into law a bill that will end civil asset forfeiture by law enforcement in the state, a practice widely known as "policing for profit." The measure is House Bill 560
Under civil asset forfeiture, police and prosecutors can seize someone's property without ever charging them with a crime, let alone convicting them. Police can then funnel many of those assets, including cash seizures, back to their own departments, creating a vicious cycle of more profit-driven law enforcement providing more resources to law enforcement for more profit-driven law enforcement.
"This is a good day for the Bill of Rights," said [American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico] Executive Director Peter Simonson. "For years, police could seize people's cash, cars, and houses without even accusing anyone of a crime. Today, we have ended this unfair practice in New Mexico and replaced it with a model that is just and constitutional."
The practice of asset forfeiture has been coming under increasing scrutiny and criticism in recent years as cases of abuse become more widely known. The Obama administration Justice Department has in the past few months taken steps to address asset forfeiture abuse at the federal level, and asset forfeiture reform bills have been introduced in a number of states this year. The governor of Wyoming vetoed one last month.
New Mexico is the first state where such a bill has passed, and it now has the strongest asset forfeiture protections in the county. The bill passed the legislature unanimously.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 13 2015, @05:02AM
Oh, also this WaPo article [washingtonpost.com] makes it clear that even congress was getting fed up with this program at the federal level.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2015, @05:08AM
Is the congress getting fed up because it is unjust, or is it because they don't get a cut?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2015, @06:35AM
Congress was not involved in this at all. The legislation under discussion is a state law, in New Mexico. One which should serve as a model for 49 other state laws, as well as a federal law.
Due process is due process - and civil forfeiture has never used due process to take people's property. Armed men just take your stuff, and it's gone!
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Monday April 13 2015, @06:22PM
It was really a big mistake that the courts decided to allow this kind of behavior in the first place. And the claim they accepted is that since you can actually initiate a lawsuit to reclaim your property, that the "due process" is in place. That's despite the fact that in many places you are required to put up a bond equal to the value of the seized property before you are even allowed to file the suit. Which can often take years.
I am a crackpot