Court Rules Against LEGALIZED Government Theft

A Nevada court has dealt a significant blow to civil asset forfeiture practices, ruling that law enforcement cannot use federal loopholes to bypass state laws.

At a Glance

  • Nevada court ruled against police using federal programs to circumvent state civil forfeiture laws
  • Case originated from the 2021 seizure of Marine veteran Stephen Lara’s life savings during a traffic stop
  • Nevada’s civil forfeiture laws are more stringent than federal laws, requiring higher proof for property seizure
  • Decision has significant implications for property owners in Nevada and potentially nationwide
  • Ruling seen as a warning to other states about misuse of federal equitable sharing program

Court Ruling Strengthens Property Rights

In a landmark decision, a Nevada court has reinforced the state’s civil asset forfeiture laws, ruling that law enforcement agencies cannot use federal programs to bypass more stringent state regulations. The case, which originated from the 2021 seizure of Marine veteran Stephen Lara’s life savings during a routine traffic stop, has gained national attention for its potential to reshape civil forfeiture practices across the country.

Washoe County Second Judicial District Court Judge Connie Steinheimer ruled that Nevada’s participation in the federal civil asset forfeiture program is unlawful, effectively banning the practice statewide. The decision prevents the Nevada Highway Patrol from seizing property under state law and processing it federally to receive up to 80% of the proceeds, a practice that has long been criticized by civil liberties advocates.

Implications for Property Owners

The ruling has significant implications for property owners in Nevada, reinforcing state law protections against federal program exploitation. Nevada’s civil forfeiture laws are more stringent than federal laws, requiring higher proof for property seizure and quicker judicial review. The court emphasized that these state laws are mandatory and do not allow for federal workarounds.

“This is a groundbreaking decision that closes the door on law enforcement agencies trying to evade their own state laws for profit,” Ben Field, Attorney at the Institute for Justice, said. “The court recognized that Nevada’s civil forfeiture laws are clear: state police cannot outsource forfeitures to the federal government to make extra money. This ruling is a big step toward ending the abuse of civil forfeiture nationwide.”

The decision is seen as a warning to other states about the misuse of the federal equitable sharing program, which has been criticized for incentivizing law enforcement to seize property for financial gain rather than legitimate law enforcement purposes.

The Case of Stephen Lara

The case that sparked this ruling involved Stephen Lara, a Marine veteran whose life savings of nearly $90,000 was seized by the Nevada Highway Patrol during a traffic stop in February 2021. Despite having documentation proving the money was from legitimate sources, the officer seized the cash and transferred it to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration without evidence of a crime.

“Though justice has been delayed for Stephen, he is adamant that—with IJ’s help—it will not be denied,” Ben Field said.

Lara, with the support of the Institute for Justice, filed a federal lawsuit and eventually recovered his money seven months later. However, the incident spurred a broader legal challenge to prevent similar occurrences in the future. Lara continues his legal battle for damages and additional claims under the Nevada Constitution.

While the state is expected to challenge the ruling, this decision marks a significant victory for civil liberties advocates. It sets a precedent that could influence similar cases across the nation, potentially leading to reform in how civil asset forfeiture is conducted and overseen.