3 ms·

Good for them. But my understanding is that local cops can still seize an asset, declare that it was really a Federal seizure, have the money assigned to feder

Good for them. But my understanding is that local cops can still seize an asset, declare that it was really a Federal seizure, have the money assigned to federal government, then the federal government gives most of it back as a bounty. The whole program seems to be a way for the Feds to encourage local police to follow federal priorities rather than local priorities and sadly I'm sure the current attorney general will be looking for ways to do more of that.

syshum 9y ago
Yep, and in CT is seems 93% of revenue cam from the Federal Sharing program http://ij.org/pfp-state-pages/pfp-Connecticut/ http://ij.org/pfp-state-pages/pfp-Connecticut/
- camiller 9y ago
  That article only shows data through 2013, a number of states have changed their laws in the last four years.
cr1895 9y ago
>The whole program seems to be a way for the Feds to encourage local police to follow federal priorities rather than local priorities and sadly I'm sure the current attorney general will be looking for ways to do more of that. Yes, exactly; I'm guessing today's article below is what prompted the OP to post the article they did. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/17/jeff-sessions-wants-police-to-take-more-cash-from-american-citizens/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/17/jeff-... "In 2015, Eric Holder's Justice Department issued a memo sharply curtailing a particular type of forfeiture practice that allowed local police to share part of their forfeiture proceeds with federal authorities. Known as “adoptive” forfeiture, it allowed state and local authorities to sidestep sometimes stricter state laws, processing forfeiture cases under the more permissive federal statute. ... In his speech Monday, Attorney General Sessions appeared to specifically call out adoptive forfeitures as an area for potential expansion. “Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate,” he said, “as is sharing with our partners.”"

syshum 9y ago

Yep, and in CT is seems 93% of revenue cam from the Federal Sharing program http://ij.org/pfp-state-pages/pfp-Connecticut/ http://ij.org/pfp-state-pages/pfp-Connecticut/

camiller 9y ago
That article only shows data through 2013, a number of states have changed their laws in the last four years.

cr1895 9y ago

>The whole program seems to be a way for the Feds to encourage local police to follow federal priorities rather than local priorities and sadly I'm sure the current attorney general will be looking for ways to do more of that. Yes, exactly; I'm guessing today's article below is what prompted the OP to post the article they did. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/17/jeff-sessions-wants-police-to-take-more-cash-from-american-citizens/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/17/jeff-... "In 2015, Eric Holder's Justice Department issued a memo sharply curtailing a particular type of forfeiture practice that allowed local police to share part of their forfeiture proceeds with federal authorities. Known as “adoptive” forfeiture, it allowed state and local authorities to sidestep sometimes stricter state laws, processing forfeiture cases under the more permissive federal statute. ... In his speech Monday, Attorney General Sessions appeared to specifically call out adoptive forfeitures as an area for potential expansion. “Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate,” he said, “as is sharing with our partners.”"