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: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2015, @06:03AM
deann.vaught@arkansashouse.org
Subj: Grave injustices being addressed in New Mexico
Deann,
Years ago, laws were passed around this nation, in various states and other jurisdictions, permitting law enforcement agencies to seize privately owned assets from citizens, without any due process. "Civil forfeiture" is the name given these laws. And, those laws are all unconstitutional, not to mention unjust.
New Mexico has recently signed into law, a law which reverses those civil forfeiture laws.
Please, click a couple links, and familiarize yourself with the situation in New Mexico. The first link I submit below is the official site of the New Mexico Legislature, the remaining links are just news articles dealing with that legislation.
And, I truly hope that you can author, co-author, or otherwise support such a law for submission to Arkansas' House of Representatives.
http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/legislation.aspx?Chamber=H&LegType=B&LegNo=560&year=15#copy [nmlegis.gov]
http://www.alternet.org/print/drugs/new-mexico-ends-policing-profit#node-1034662 [alternet.org]
http://www.ij.org/asset-forfeiture-report-new-mexico [ij.org]
Some rather informal discussion among geeks and nerds can be found here, on SoylentNews:
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=15/04/12/2128201 [soylentnews.org]
As a member of SN, I would welcome my representative's views in the discussion!
Thank you,
I challenge every SN member to contact their own representatives! I will modify the above as appropriate, and remail it to each of my other representatives, at the state and federal levels.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2015, @11:36AM
Yeah, being a "member of SN" is going to carry a lot of weight. "If I've lost SN, I've lost middle America."
Also, I hope you don't start your letters assuming you're on a first name basis with your representatives. It is ok to do it if you are, of course. You see, when adults write letters to each other, the salutation typically contains their title, or if they don't have a formal title, then the relevant "Mr." or "Mrs." (and others for females; it gets complicated) is used. This demonstrates you're showing a general level of respect to your letter recipient, which I think is something you would want to do if you want them to consider your comments with the same level of respect.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2015, @03:52PM
This demonstrates you're showing a general level of respect to your letter recipient
That's completely subjective. Names are merely used to identify others and nothing more. That illogical humans have attached needless fluff to it is irrelevant.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday April 14 2015, @12:48AM
April 13, 2015
Dear Paul:
Thank you for contacting me about civil forfeiture. It's good to hear from you, as always.
In January, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Justice Department would no longer allow asset seizures by local police agencies under federal law. As you may know, this practice allowed local law enforcement to take property from individuals who have not been convicted of a crime.
You may be happy to know that earlier this Congress, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced the Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration (FAIR) Act (S. 255). This legislation would increase the federal government's burden of proof in civil forfeiture to clear and convincing evidence. This would require the government to establish evidence that the owner of the seized property intentionally used the valuable in connection with the offense. This bill has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where it awaits further consideration.
Please be assured that should this or similar legislation come before the Senate, I will keep your views on this matter in mind. And I hope that you will continue to keep me informed of your opinion. A well-functioning representative democracy relies on active, engaged citizens like you to inform and hold their elected leaders accountable. I always find input from my constituents on matters of public policy to be both insightful and useful as I work to represent your interests.
I am truly honored to serve as your Senator—please know that your interests and affairs have my unceasing attention. Always feel free to call my office at (202) 224-2353 or visit www.cotton.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Tom Cotton
United States Senator