Louisiana House Bill HB92

Louisiana 2018 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/21/18
• Refer: 2/21/18
• Refer: 3/12/18

Caption

(Constitutional Amendment) Expands the type of property that may be forfeited and disposed of in a civil proceeding

Impact

If approved, HB 92 would significantly alter existing statutes concerning property rights and forfeiture laws in Louisiana. Currently, the constitution limits the forfeiture of property to specific types of contraband and drug-related offenses. By broadening the definition to include any property associated with racketeering activities, the bill emphasizes a proactive approach to dismantling criminal enterprises by allowing the state to confiscate assets used in a broader range of illegal conduct. This move may enhance law enforcement's capacity to disrupt organized crime financially, but it also raises concerns regarding property rights and the potential for abuse in asset seizure.

Summary

House Bill 92 is a proposed constitutional amendment in Louisiana aimed at expanding the scope of property that may be forfeited and disposed of in civil proceedings. The bill seeks to amend Article I, Section 4(D) of the state constitution, allowing for the forfeiture of all property, movable or immovable, that is derived from, used, or intended for use in connection with a pattern of racketeering activity. This includes not only tangible assets but also money involved in such activities. The bill is positioned as a tool to strengthen the state's ability to combat organized crime and protect community safety by increasing the types of assets that can be seized in legal actions against racketeering activities.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 92 appears to be mixed among lawmakers and advocacy groups. Proponents argue that the amendment will provide essential tools for law enforcement to tackle serious crime more effectively, enhance public safety, and diminish the allure of criminal activities that involve organized racks. In contrast, critics caution against potential overreach and the implications for civil liberties, highlighting the need for robust protections against wrongful seizures. The debate reflects broader societal concerns regarding the balance between combating crime and preserving individual rights.

Contention

One of the notable points of contention regarding HB 92 centers on the potential for contributing to a culture of 'civil asset forfeiture,' which critics argue can lead to significant legal abuse, wherein individuals lose property without a conviction. Legislators and advocacy groups may raise questions about accountability within law enforcement related to how forfeiture actions are pursued and whether they afford sufficient protections for property owners. This debate echoes previous discussions around the ethics of forfeiture laws and their consequences for legal and civil rights within the state.