Latest News

Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts and the Chicago Council of Lawyers are excited to announce the release of our newest court-watching report, I Don’t Know Why I’m Here: Observations from Cook County’s Civil Asset Forfeiture Courtrooms.

From March to August of 2022, our volunteer court-watchers observed 230 civil asset forfeiture calls in the County Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County. Court-watchers noted a number of stakeholder concerns around innocent owners, support for self-represented property owners, procedural efficiency, and more, and brought up concerns of their own.

Our report examines those issues and discusses possible next steps.

What is civil asset forfeiture?

Civil asset forfeiture (CAF) is a process whereby police agencies take people’s private property including cash and vehicles if they are suspected of being involved in a crime. CAF is a different process from criminal forfeiture, which takes place in the criminal court, because a person does not need to have been convicted of a crime to have their property taken. In other words, a person’s actual guilt or innocence is irrelevant in the civil asset forfeiture process. A person’s criminal case can even be dropped and their property still be taken as long as the search was justified by probable cause. Since law enforcement are able to take people’s property without the usual checks and balances of the law that exist in criminal court, CAF has been called “legalized theft” by experts.

Why is it a racial and economic equity issue?

Civil Asset Forfeiture laws were originally created to cripple large organized crime and drug trafficking activities. However, as the law has been used outside of those parameters, and now, CAF is used against some of the most marginalized communities. Advocates and scholars have criticized CAF not only for violating people’s right to due process but also because it disproportionately harms low-income communities of color and creates a financial incentive for police departments to seize civilian’s assets. 

Where does the money go?

In 2021, the Chicago Police Department (CPD) seized a total of 1,694 assets valued at over $8 million. The money earned by the sale of these assets bolsters law enforcement agencies’ funding. CPD does not disclose to the public how they use civil asset forfeiture funds. In 2016, the Chicago Reader described CPD’s forfeiture fund as an “off-the-books stream of income.”

Although Illinois reformed CAF law in 2019, CAF continues to be a concerning feature of Illinois state law. Despite making strides to improve CAF law, Illinois CAF laws continue to be problematic.

In a 2020 report, the Institute for Justice describes Illinois law enforcement as having a large profit incentive because 90% of forfeiture proceeds go to law enforcement.  Police departments continue to have a large incentive to use CAF in order to fund themselves.

What can be done about civil asset forfeiture?

Civil asset forfeiture is a confusing, costly, and lengthy process that is ineffective at deterring crime, does not have an impact on crime rates, and disproportionately harms lower-income people of color.

Given these concerns, our court-watchers observed 230 civil asset forfeiture cases in Cook County. Among other things, our findings show:

• The most common reasons for seizure are allegations of non-violent crimes: drug possession,
  driving without a license, and aggravated fleeing or eluding.
• Over 90% of cases observed by court-watchers1 where the property was identified involved a
  vehicle being seized. The median value of property seized was $7,050.
• Many property owners (at least 19% of those observed) were confused about the CAF process and
  had minimal guidance. Most property owners (67%) did not have an attorney.
• All judges observed were largely regarded as impartial, although demeanor and communication
  varied. Around 22% of the cases observed involved some sort of administrative difficulty, such as
  the property owner being unaware of their case number, and another 11.7% of cases experienced
  difficulties with Zoom teleconferencing.

In our report, we describe the harms experienced by self-represented litigants and advocate for the end of civil asset forfeiture in the state of Illinois. Our findings make clear that civil asset forfeiture is an unethical, flawed system that does not align with U.S. conceptions of property rights or due process, and disproportionately impacts Illinois’ most vulnerable residents.

Civil asset forfeiture does not serve communities by making them safer but serves police departments by making them richer. Read the report below for our complete list of recommendations on how to address issues associated with CAF and create a more equitable system.