It’s been a nice few weeks for civil liberties in Montana. On the heels of the nation’s most comprehensive restrictions on police militarization, Montana Governor Steve Bullock (D) has signed a bill reforming civil asset forfeiture in the state.


HB463 requires a criminal conviction before seized property can be forfeited, requires that seized property be shown by “clear and convincing evidence” to be connected to the criminal activity, and bolsters the defenses for innocent owners by shifting the burden of proof to the government.


The effort was spearheaded by State Representative Kelly McCarthy (D), who credited the work of the Institute for Justice and other civil liberties organizations for bringing the abuses of civil asset forfeiture to light.


McCarthy told the Daily Caller News Foundation:

“After looking into Montana laws and working with the Institute for Justice, we found that our laws provided no greater property rights protections than those states who were identified with rampant abuse, (Texas, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Virginia, etc.).


From that time I began meeting with stakeholders and working on the bill.”

Montana is now the second state in less than a month to heavily restrict state‐​level civil asset forfeiture, following New Mexico. It must be noted that the Montana reforms are less robust than those that passed in New Mexico last month. 


Unlike the New Mexico law, the Montana law does not restrict law enforcement agencies’ exploitation of federal forfeiture laws that maintain the lower burdens of proof and the civil proceedings that Montana now restricts at the state level. The bill also allows Montana law enforcement to keep the proceeds of their seizures, whereas the New Mexico law requires that such proceeds be deposited into the general fund, thus depriving police of any profit motive for initiating seizures.


That said, the Montana law represents substantial progress for a state that the Institute for Justice labeled “terrible” on civil asset forfeiture, and all those who worked for its passage should be commended for striking a blow in favor of due process and property rights.


That a traditionally red state like Montana with a Democratic governor and a traditionally blue state like New Mexico with a Republican governor have both passed substantial civil asset forfeiture reforms this year is a testament to the bipartisan consensus building around restricting this inherently abusive practice.