City should obey state civil forfeiture rule

WE ARE advocates for civil forfeiture reform, including the lawyers who sued to challenge Albuquerque’s forfeiture program, and we agree the city must revamp the program following (U.S.) Judge (James) Browning’s recent decision finding it unconstitutional.

But your Aug. 1 editorial, “For safety’s sake, ABQ must revamp DWI seizures,” leaves out one key detail.

In an earlier decision, Judge Browning also ruled that the program violates New Mexico’s 2015 law abolishing civil forfeiture. As some of us noted in a previous op-ed, Albuquerque needs to stop violating state civil forfeiture rule, any reform needs to comply with that state law. That means no more taking cars owned by people who were not the ones driving. Period. Until Albuquerque brings its program into line with the 2015 law, it will remain open to legal challenge.

If the mayor is open to assistance, we stand ready to draft the city an ordinance that follows state law, complies with Judge Browning’s ruling, punishes convicted drunk(en) drivers and protects the rights of innocent vehicle owners.

Editor’s note: Johnson is an attorney at the Institute for Justice. This letter was also signed onto by Brad Cates, who represents Arlene Harjo in her case challenging the city’s forfeiture program; Hal Stratton, a former New Mexico attorney general; Steven Robert Allen, director of public policy at the ACLU of New Mexico; and Emily Kaltenbach, the New Mexico state director at the Drug Policy Alliance.