Speaker Chatfield, Leader Greig, AG Nessel support bipartisan plan

House Speaker Lee Chatfield voices support for a bipartisan civil asset forfeiture reform plan during a press conference today in the Michigan House chamber. He was joined by Minority Leader Christine Greig, left, and Attorney General Dana Nessel, center, as well as Reps. Jason Wentworth and David LaGrand.

A bipartisan plan to reform civil asset forfeiture is laid out in the first two bills of the new legislative session of the Michigan House of Representatives. The plan – sponsored by state Reps. Jason Wentworth, a Republican from Clare, and David LaGrand, a Democrat from Grand Rapids – would require a criminal conviction before private property is seized from people through the civil asset forfeiture process.

The first bill introduced in the House traditionally represents a major priority for the chamber and its leadership, and House Bills 4001-02 are no different. Criminal justice reform has received increased attention in the Legislature in recent years, and civil asset forfeiture reform is a top priority for new Attorney General Dana Nessel, newly-elected Speaker of the House Lee Chatfield and House Democratic Leader Christine Greig.

“Civil asset forfeiture reform will be our first bill, because it is a strong, bipartisan reform that safeguards the rights of every single Michigan resident,” said Chatfield, of Levering. “I have said from the very beginning that this chamber is going to find areas of common ground where we can all work together to pursue real solutions to help the people we represent. Civil asset forfeiture is a perfect example of that, and working together on this important reform for people all across the state sets the right tone for the term ahead.”

Nessel praised the House’s commitment to taking swift action to fix the civil asset forfeiture law.

“I strongly support the concept that the forfeiture of civilian assets to a law enforcement agency require a criminal conviction,” Nessel said. “I appreciate the fact that Speaker Chatfield has made this issue the subject of the first two bills introduced in the House this legislative session. I am pleased to stand by his side to reinforce the powerful bipartisan support this issue garnered in the House during the last session and the strong bipartisan support it continues to deserve. I look forward to working closely with Speaker Chatfield, the members of the House, and my legal team in the Attorney General’s office to make certain that the language of the bills properly protects the residents of the state of Michigan against actions that violate their right to due process under the law.”

Greig, of Farmington Hills, said: “Our plan sets the tone for the 100th Legislature, that we are ready to put partisan politics aside to get to work for Michigan families. This is the first of many steps we can take together to build bridges, close loopholes and collaborate on good policy to ensure that working families have what they need to thrive in Michigan.”

Wentworth and LaGrand said the current civil asset forfeiture process violates the due process rights of Michigan residents by giving law enforcement agencies the authority to keep the property of individuals who haven’t even been charged with a crime.

The new plan still allows officers to seize property based on probable cause, but requires a criminal conviction before law enforcement agencies can sell or use the property. This will ensure an individual’s personal property can easily be returned if they are found not guilty.

“Our local law enforcement officers should be commended. They’re doing a great job,” Wentworth said. “But we must also take precautions to ensure innocent people aren’t treated like criminals when it comes to civil asset forfeiture. Requiring a conviction will protect the due process rights of Michigan citizens.”

In 2017, Michigan law enforcement agencies reported confiscating $13.1 million worth of cash and property through civil asset forfeiture. In more than 200 cases, people who were found not guilty were forced to forfeit their property, never to have it returned. In a staggering 736 cases, charges were never even filed.

“Action that takes away citizens’ property is a serious step, and should be undertaken carefully and with safeguards to protect our citizens,” LaGrand said. “I’ve been on both sides of litigation on asset forfeiture as an assistant prosecutor and an attorney, and I’ve seen firsthand that many citizens facing asset forfeiture are confused, don’t know how to proceed, and lack the resources to defend themselves. This plan allows law enforcement to go after bad actors, while providing better protections for our citizens and their legitimate property interests.”

The legislation has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration.

###