CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS PUSHED ASIDE DURING WAR ON DRUGS

AUSTIN, Texas - And in other news ... the War on Drugs is ripping up the
Constitution, endangering American liberty and encouraging law enforcement
officers to act like bandits.

The unpleasant ramifications of the War on Drugs are too numerous for one
column, but the area of asset forfeiture deserves special consideration.

On Oct. 2, 1992, a team of officers from the Los Angeles police, the Park
Service, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Forest Service, the
California National Guard and the California Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement
staged a raid on the home of Donald Scott, a 61-year-old rancher, near
Malibu. Armed with high-powered weapons, flak jackets, a battering ram and
a presumably legal search warrant, they kicked in the door and rushed
through the house.

Scott's wife began screaming; he went to her side with a gun and was shot
to death before her eyes. The officers found no marijuana plants, other
drugs or paraphernalia. It turned out that Scott was bitterly opposed to
all drug use.

According to The Nation magazine, a subsequent investigation revealed that
there was no credible evidence of marijuana cultivation on Scott's ranch,
that the sheriff's department had knowingly sought the search warrant on
legally insufficient information, and that much of the information
supporting the warrant was false, while exculpatory evidence was withheld
from the judge.

As they invaded the property, the officers - with two forfeiture
specialists in tow - had a property appraisal of Scott's $5 million ranch
and instructions to seize the ranch if 14 marijuana plants were found. n In
a much-noted case, a Detroit woman had her car seized after her husband was
found using it to dally with a prostitute. The Supreme Court upheld the
forfeiture, even though the woman was clearly not involved in her husband's
illegal activity.

A 72-year-old grandmother in Washington, D.C., lost her home after letting
a nephew, who was suspected of drug dealing, stay there overnight. n The
owner of an air-charter business in Las Vegas lost his livelihood when he
unknowingly chartered a plane to a drug dealer. n In 1997, NBC's "Dateline"
did a prize-winning expose of the practice of Louisiana sheriff's deputies
stopping motorists with little or no cause and seizing cars and cash under
the state's forfeiture laws. The deputies started a slush fund with the money.

According to "Dateline," deputies used the fund to pay for a ski trip,
pizza and doughnuts; thousands of dollars were unaccounted for.

According to the Wisconsin State Journal, all this started in 1984, when
Congress passed the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, which allowed drug
money and "drug-related assets" to be funneled into the police agencies
that seize them. Between 1985 and 1991, the Justice Department collected
more than $1.5 billion in illegal assets; in the next five years, it almost
doubled this intake, according to a report by The Nation. Local law
enforcement agencies fight to "federalize" their drug busts because if a
U.S. attorney "adopts" a forfeiture, 80 percent of the assets are returned
to local police, whereas under many state laws, forfeited assets go to
school funds, libraries, drug education or other programs.

According to The Nation, some small-town police forces have increased their
budgets by a factor of five or more through seizing assets.

This is also deforming the efforts to control drugs; police forces can get
far more money by busting small-time marijuana buyers in reverse stings
(where the cops sell drugs to unsuspecting customers) and then seizing
their assets than they can by, say, going after major methamphetamine
dealers who work on street corners.

This entire practice is rapidly becoming worse and worse, causing more and
more injustice, police lawlessness and distorted law enforcement
priorities. This is one of those times when the right and the left can
unite in opposition to government abuse.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the National Rifle Association have
opposed these practices. Rep. Barney Frank, the liberal Democrat, and Rep.
Bob Barr, the conservative Republican, both support reform.

The Wall Street Journal is as concerned as The Nation.

Surely the property-rights people, who seem to consider the Endangered
Species Act a threat to liberty, would like to join the ACLU on this one.
The political problem is that we have created a monster.

Law enforcement just loves asset-forfeiture laws; agencies have practically
become self-financing through these abuses.

And when the coppers of the nation stand in unison and say, "We need this
for law 'n' order," mighty few politicians are willing to go against them.
(Envision the ads in their re-election campaigns: "My opponent sided with
the drug dealers and against the police officers of our fair state.")

The only way to get the politicians to undo what they have done is to build
public pressure to stop this outrageous practice.

Take pen in hand ...