An Act relative to civil asset forfeiture improvements
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Create an account to take a stance, submit a written position, or contact your legislator.
Progress
Where this bill stands in the legislative process.
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Overview
This bill aims to improve the civil asset forfeiture process in Massachusetts. It seeks to address concerns about potential abuses of the law, particularly regarding the balance between law enforcement’s ability to seize assets and the rights of individuals. The bill intends to increase transparency and accountability in these cases, ensuring due process protections for those whose property is subject to forfeiture.
Key provisions
- Requires enhanced judicial oversight in civil asset forfeiture proceedings.
- Mandates greater transparency in reporting forfeiture data.
- Establishes procedures for challenging forfeiture actions.
- Addresses potential conflicts of interest involving law enforcement officers.
- Requires a higher burden of proof for prosecutors seeking forfeiture.
- Promotes the return of assets that were improperly seized.
Who is affected
- Individuals whose property is subject to forfeiture
- Law enforcement agencies
- Prosecutors
- The judiciary
- Asset forfeiture funds
Notable changes
- The bill seeks to strengthen protections for property owners during civil asset forfeiture.
- It aims to reduce the potential for law enforcement to profit from seized assets.
- It may require changes to existing forfeiture procedures and regulations.
Bill text
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.
Text extraction is in progress. View the official source.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
5 on record
Primary sponsor
Bradley H. Jones Jr.
Cosponsors
Bradley H. Jones Jr.
Kimberly N. Ferguson
Arguments
Reasons offered for and against this legislation.
Arguments in favor
No arguments in favor have been submitted.
Submit yoursArguments opposed
No arguments opposed have been submitted.
Submit yours