On Wednesday, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey signed civil asset forfeiture reform legislation, House Bill 2810, sponsored by Rep. Travis Grantham and passed by decisive majorities in the Arizona House and Senate.
House Bill 2810 becomes law 90 days after the Legislature adjourns.
Currently there is no requirement that the government prove that seized property is connected to a crime, which has resulted in property being taken from innocent people. This legislation protects Arizonans’ rights while maintaining law enforcement’s ability to hold criminals accountable.
“Since the cost of the court cases often exceeds the value of the seized property, a huge disincentive exists for citizens to challenge such takings,” said Victor Riches of the Goldwater Institute on Wednesday. “To make matters worse, forfeiture creates a system stacked dramatically in favor of the government, and against its citizens. Among other problems, property owners must prove their own innocence to get their property back. But it’s difficult to prove a negative, and it’s even more difficult when most people can’t afford to hire an attorney.”
The legislation, which was championed by the Goldwater Institute, requires that property can only be seized if it is evidence of a crime, has been abandoned, is subject to forfeiture, or it is illegal for a person to possess it. It also includes provisions that ensure that an innocent person has a process to get it returned.
“Arizona’s Constitution provides broad protections for personal rights and property — broader so than the United States Constitution. As such, when reviewing legislation, I have a constitutional responsibility to provide a balance between those rights and ensuring that law enforcement has the tools necessary to protect our state,” the Governor said in a letter. “HB 2810 provides this balance. And it ensures that law enforcement has the ability to seize property pending forfeiture or if the property is evidence of a crime. It ensures that property being taken is truly connected to criminal activity while innocent persons have the ability to get their property back.”