The U.S. Department of Justice has ordered the DEA to cease searching passengers at airports, following an Inspector General’s investigation showing that the people doing these searches – which often led to confiscation of cash from travelers without any charges being filed – lacked proper training and kept insufficient documentation, leading to a likelihood of committing constitutional rights violations.
The decision to stop “consensual encounter” airport searches (and searches at other transit hubs) was made a little over a week ago, but the report was only just released today, highlighting a decade of abuses including the strong suggestion that the DEA was performing these searches for the purpose of seizing funds for its own use.
In a 10-year period, the DEA seized over $4 billion in cash, the vast majority of which was unconnected to any criminal charge.
Searches will now only be allowed if connected to an ongoing criminal investigation or approved under exigent circumstances by the DEA Administrator.
I’ve written about civil asset forfeiture at airports before, and even served as an expert witness in a case against the practice. The DEA frequently targets minorities so they’ve stopped tracking race. Police records though contain data showing 56% of jetbridge stops are of black passengers, while 68% are minorities.
- The government seizes cash without charging anyone with a crime.
- Then the victim has to prove the money wasn’t used in a crime to get it back. There’s a byzantine process for doing this, and usually the victim has to enter into a partial settlement to get anything back at all, which includes a promise not to sue.
- And the way this is all structured, the agency seizing the money gets to keep part of it for themselves.
Even just flying Atlanta to Los Angeles is enough for a stop and seizure, because passengers are flying from ‘one known drug location’ to another. The government considers one way tickets suspicious, even though airline pricing practices have changed so that it often makes more sense to book one ways.
Ultimately it’s important to know that even though it is your right, it’s a good idea not to carry large amounts of cash with you at the airport. It’s subject to confiscation. And if you’re carrying more than $10,000 out of the United States, you need to register that with the government – not just with the country you’re carrying it into.
More on civil asset forfeiture, from Last Week Tonight:
That took too damn long to happen! And while that’s great going forward, they really need to make it right for every penny of that $3.2B plus interest. I still don’t understand how this was ever legal, and why the ACLU wasn’t on it like white on rice.
Now it’s Hertz’s turn to get hauled into court, slapped silly, and forced to compensate all the customers they had falsely arrested. Would love to see some C-suite jackholes do a little time, maybe count up the hours and days everyone who was arrested spent in custody and make that part of the deal.
Having to prove your money isn’t going to be used for nefarious purposes is a violation of the 5th amendment, period. Federal law enforcement always gets away because of mega funding and very rarely will the executive oval office will intervene on such matters.
A first step. Now stop local law enforcement from stealing.
I’d prefer it if SCOTUS put a stop to the practice, not the violators themselves.
thus if the law enforcement agency seizing the money gets to keep part of it for themselves.
iS THAT NOT A BRIBE?
Most people have a plan, such as to buy a car, house down payment, or to pay for business expenses but have little documentation.
I carry at most $300, $1000 on international trips, but have no documentation for the money.
I’ve declared carrying more than $10,000 in traveler’s cheques internationally before at LAX. It is a pain to find the office and if I remember correctly, they were closed for lunch. Fortunately I had enough time in my schedule to deal with it.
@Katie, I’m with you on this.