August 25, 2006 3:58PM 

# Seizures for SWAT 

By [Radley Balko](https://www.cato.org/people/radley-balko) 

---

<a class="js-popover-trigger cursor-pointer popover-trigger" data-bs-placement="bottom" data-bs-trigger="click" id="popover-trigger"> 

SHARE 

</a> 

[The​News​pa​per​.com reports](http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/13/1305.asp) that several towns in South Texas are ratcheting up money and property seizures from motorists:

> In the South Texas city of San Juan, population 26,200, police have begun seizing ever greater amounts by taking both cash and vehicles from motorists. In 2005, officers collected $4400. This year, however, the force has collected $67,000. Pharr, with a population of 47,000, collected $422,000 last year. McAllen, a bigger city with 106,000 residents, collected $484,000. A federal appeals court ruling this week concluded that driving with a large amount of cash is sufficient justification for police to confiscate it, even if there is no evidence that a crime has been committed.

[Guess what](http://www.catostore.org/index.asp?fa=ProductDetails&method=cats&scid=15&pid=1441318) these towns are apparently doing with the money?

On a related note, [a number of cities and towns](http://www.theagitator.com/archives/026919.php#026919) across the country have apparently been given between $100,000 and $200,000 in Homeland Security funding to purchase armored personnel carriers for their SWAT teams. If I remember correctly, the Department of Homeland Security was supposed to be a government agency charged with fighting terrorism and responding to natural disasters.

I suppose it’s possible that places like Lake Canyon, Idaho, Eau Claire, Wisconsin, and Tuscaloosa, Alabama are high-risk terror targets. But my guess is that their new federally-funded military-grade toys will primarily be used for routine enforcement of drug laws. This quote from an official in Eau Claire seems to confirm my suspicions:

> An armored truck isn’t necessary for all situations where SWAT teams are used, Matysik said.
> 
> 
> “But because it’s available, we’ll probably use it just to be cautious,” he said.

The militarization of domestic policing continues.

##### Related Tags 

[General](https://www.cato.org/general), [Constitutional Law](https://www.cato.org/constitutional-law), [Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies](https://www.cato.org/robert-levy-center-constitutional-studies) 

[![Creative Commons License](/build/cato_2020/images/creative-commons.svg)](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) 
This work is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).