Does the Government Have the Right to Seize Your Property? Here's a Hint: It Does

What do a Christian band rock band and a Kentucky politician have in common? 

Both saw their personal belongings disappear through a practice called civil asset forfeiture. 

"After all of this, I just want to get the money back to the proper owners," said Eh Wah, manager of the band Klo & Kweh Music Team.

Eh Wah was pulled over by Oklahoma law enforcement after a week on the road with the band. The $30,000 they'd raised for charity and an additional $20,000 more was seized.

Police believed him to be a drug dealer though no drugs were found.
 
GOP candidate Gerardo Serrano lost his truck after border patrol officers found five bullets in his console. Border patrol accused him of smuggling "munitions of war."

He was detained but never charged. It would take two years and a costly battle but he got his truck back. 

 
The practice of seizing private property is perfectly legal.
 
"Law enforcement has a suspicion that something you've got on you, a fancy car, whatever money is in your glove compartment, may have been involved in a crime in some way and they say, 'Because of my suspicion, I'm just going to take this,' " explained Vikrant Reddy, senior research fellow at the Charles Koch Institute. 
 
Defenders say there are positive sides to civil asset forfeiture since local law enforcement can use the resources for equipment and salaries.

According to the Institute for Justice, the Department of Justice alone used it to take $4.5 billion in 2014.
 
But some lawmakers say the practice goes too far, and they want to put it on trial.
 
"Many poor people in our country have cash taken from them. And then the government says, 'prove to them where you got the cash and then you can get it back,' but the burden is on the individual," explained Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY).
 
Then came the Supreme Court.

In the case of Timbs v. Indiana, the court decided the $42,000 vehicle seized from Tyson Timbs was excessive and more than four times the amount in fines he would've paid for his conviction.
 
While the court's ruling doesn't end asset forfeiture, experts predict it will help fuel the next big bipartisan push.

"A lot of lawmakers on the Right and the Left are saying, 'My goodness, isn't this a violation of individual liberties?'" said Reddy.

"It's one thing if you convict somebody… but if you haven't been convicted the government is just taking your private property," he explained.