“Police get to keep the money they seize?”
Asset forfeiture is the process of law enforcement seizing private assets they think were involved in some way with a crime. To my surprise, they get to keep the proceeds from this process, leading to concerns regarding “policing for profit” where law enforcement prioritizes crimes from which they can expect a financial return. I wanted to discover the extent to which this concern is justified.
Since 2002, the California Department of Justice has published yearly reports of asset forfeiture in the state; as PDFs. I have taken these PDFs and converted them into analyzable data files. After combining this information with contextual data about jurisdictions and law enforcement agencies, I am working to test how equal and profit driven asset forfeiture really is.
This is an ongoing project, and I will update this page as I complete further components.
Project Links:
Please cite as:
Joseph, J., & McCarthy, B. (2023). California Civil Asset Forfeiture and the Policing of Minority Residents. Law & Social Inquiry, 48(4), 1138-1156. doi:10.1017/lsi.2022.84
Abstract
The 1984 Comprehensive Crime Control Act expanded federal and local law enforcement power to seize cash and assets they suspected were involved with illegal activity. Critics note the act, and its generous guidelines, perversely incentivized law enforcement to “police for profit,” or use civil asset forfeiture (CAF) as a way to fund their activities. Drawing on racial threat theory and related ideas, I theorize that law enforcement added CAF seizures to the list of techniques, such as stop and frisk and excessive force, disproportionately used to police areas that have large minority populations. I examine these predictions with an analysis of 19 years of CAF data from the California Attorney General. Consistent with my expectations, the number of forfeitures is positively associated with the percent Black and percent poor in a jurisdiction, despite those seizures garnering smaller financial returns. Conversely, LatinX communities have more wealth extracted, despite experiencing average numbers of seizures. Despite the narrative that CAF is a potent tool against crime, I find that it is used less often in jurisdictions with higher crime rates. These factors invite a reconsideration of the utility and equity of the asset forfeiture process.
Suites, Streets, and States Conference and Symposium Celebrating the Research of John Hagan
I presented the first draft of this project with my mentor, Dr. Bill McCarthy, at the symposium held to honor the work of John Hagan. While the project has progressed far since then, the talk still provides a good overview of the project.