Lawsuit Accuses Government of Abusing Civil Forfeiture Procedures Against Gun Shop Owners
As we have previously covered, civil asset forfeiture has recently received scrutiny at the federal level over the law enforcement practice that enables law enforcement to seize cash, cars, real estate and other assets suspected of being connected to criminal activity, even if the owner is not ever charged with a crime in connection to that property. Recently, New Lenox business owners, Jeffery Regnier and Greta Keranen, sued the Will County Sheriff’s Office, the US Secret Service, and named some of their employees in a lawsuit alleging that law enforcement abused their authority when it seized nearly $5.5 million worth of their property in connection to a 2023 investigation into possible money laundering. The two had the assets seized after law enforcement executed a warrant on their homes and businesses as a result of that investigation and have been charged with 29 criminal counts for fraud and theft related to allegations of abusing COVID-19 relief funds, along with other offenses according to their indictments filed. The lawsuit claims that only roughly $274,000 in funds could be tied to the statements contained in the warrant that supported the search warrants, but that law enforcement seized five cars (one of which was later returned) and investment accounts with roughly $4.4 million of value at the time of the search, far in excess of the value what they claim could be connected to any alleged illegal conduct. The lawsuit alleges that the seizure violated their Constitutional rights in several ways and that the affidavit filed in support of the search warrants was false and used to target the civil assets in practice. The lawyers and business owners claim that law enforcement agencies in the county systemically use civil asset forfeiture in a systemic fashion to deprive individuals of their property, particularly since owners are not entitled to provided counsel when the forfeitures are civil in nature as opposed to criminal matters. Keranen said. “I’m not alone, there are people that have far less and can’t fight and cannot afford to fight and they (prosecutors) are taking advantage of it.” Under Illinois law, any forfeited property is divided between various government agencies, with 65% of proceeds going to the arresting agency, 12.5% to the state’s attorney office and state appellate prosecutor, and 10% to the Illinois State Police, which some believe improperly incentivizes law enforcement to seize more assets than they should under the spirit of the law and violate individuals’ constitutional rights. The lawsuit claims that these violations are still “ongoing, pervasive and rampant.” It’s easy to see why some feel there could be some abuse in the system, with $18.2 million in cash being seized and $16.8 million in cash and property being awarded to law enforcement in Illinois in 2023 according to reports from the Illinois State Police.
Further Reform Needed in Reporting Requirements in Forfeiture Cases
In 2019, the state of Alabama began requiring police to disclose the amount of civil assets seized by law enforcement, which has led to a sharp decline in the number of cases opened. When it enacted this disclosure requirement, Alabama became the twenty-third state to require this type of disclosure, but advocates say more can be done to increase transparency. The Southern Poverty Law Center released a report that noted a markedly larger number of cases opened in counties with higher populations of African Americans in recent years, with a decrease in counties and judicial circuits with higher white populations, with calls for even more increased transparency to combat these effects, particularly since between 2020 and 2024 almost half the civil forfeiture cases did not have any arrests connected to the seizures in the state. “Free, comprehensive, and open data would be an important deterrent to future policing-for-profit schemes in Alabama,” the SPLC said in their report. Such data could be helpful, as it can be used to spotlight potential areas of abuse, either by particular agencies or that effect certain populations. This issue is not confined to Alabama, as the potential for abuse exists across the United States in any courtroom that rules on asset forfeiture. It is important that anyone who has an asset seized contact an experienced asset forfeiture attorney immediately who can fight for the return of their property, particularly there are hard deadlines for filing claims and protecting your interests.
