There’s no law against carrying large amounts of bills. But in some cases, civil forfeiture makes it effectively illegal — and punishes the innocent.
There’s no law against carrying large amounts of bills. But in some cases, civil forfeiture makes it effectively illegal — and punishes the innocent.
D rug couriers carry cash, so the police assume the worst when they find money in a trunk, suitcase, or closet. Yet people use physical currency for a variety of legitimate reasons. Marine veteran Stephen Lara simply trusts himself more than banks.
When he drove from Texas to California to see his two teenage daughters in February 2021, he brought his life savings with him for safekeeping. A backpack in the trunk of his rental car contained about $86,900, along with receipts showing three years’ worth of bank withdrawals.
The money came from honest labor, and carrying cash is not a crime. So Lara had nothing to hide when the Nevada Highway Patrol pulled him over on suspicion of making an unsafe lane change near Reno, Nev. Bodycam video shows that Lara complied with police orders, answered questions, and remained calm. He even consented to a vehicle search, which produced no drugs, weapons, or contraband of any type.
Ultimately the officers released Lara without arresting him or issuing a citation. He was free to go, but not with his money. The agency seized the full amount and handed it over to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration for civil forfeiture, a moneymaking scheme that allows the government to take and keep assets without convicting anyone of a crime.
What followed was silence. The DEA sat on Lara’s life savings for months, never accusing him of a crime and ignoring federal deadlines that require the government to proceed with forfeiture or return the money.
Failure to follow rules can produce swift consequences in reverse. If property owners fail to file the right paperwork on time, or if they make other missteps, they can lose their assets without ever seeing a judge. Once the process ends, participating agencies can split up to 100 percent of the proceeds among themselves.
The financial stakes are high, incentivizing the government to see all cash as dirty — no matter how weak the evidence. Before the officers pulled away, leaving Lara destitute on the side of the road more than 1,000 miles from home, he made one final appeal to their humanity.
“You’re taking food out of my kids’ mouths,” he told them.
Nobody cared. Civil forfeiture routinely produces miscarriages of justice. In 2015, officers took birthday money from a Miami girl preparing for her once-in-a-lifetime quinceañera. In 2016, officers took donation money for Thai orphans and Burmese refugees. In 2017, officers took medical-clinic funds for Nigerian women and children. Officers also took pension savings from a retired train engineer in Pennsylvania and home-repair money from Albanian immigrants in Ohio.
All of these people eventually got their money back, including Lara, but not without expensive litigation and delays. Others are not so lucky. Rather than accept the abuse, Lara is continuing his court battle against the Nevada Highway Patrol to force reform. His demands include an end to “equitable sharing,” which allows local and state agencies to circumvent Nevada law by handing off forfeiture cases to the federal government. Lara also asks the court to require interim hearings in all forfeiture cases within 30 days of seizure, so property owners are not left in limbo.
Our public-interest law firm, the Institute for Justice, represents him. The case hinges on basic due-process rights and constitutional guarantees against unreasonable search and seizure.
Among other issues, the case highlights the built-in discrimination against law-abiding citizens who carry cash — and not just for paying babysitters and tipping waiters. Nearly 5 percent of U.S. households have no alternative. They are “unbanked,” meaning no household member has access to checking or savings accounts. These people tend to be poorer and older than the general population and are more likely to be black or Hispanic.
Even when people have debit and credit cards, they still rely on cash for certain large transactions. Anyone who has tried selling a car on Craigslist or Facebook Marketplace understands.
Too much can go wrong when a complete stranger shows up and wants to take title to one of your most valuable possessions. You can travel together to a bank and watch the buyer purchase a cashier’s check. But cash is easier, especially when you want to close a deal during evening, weekend, or holiday hours.
Entire industries use a similar “cash and carry” model to streamline operations and reduce risk. The concept is simple: Buyers can settle invoices in cash and carry away big-ticket items immediately. Wholesale grocers sometimes use this model. So do auctioneers who sell used farm and restaurant equipment, trucks, and heavy machinery.
Mississippi driver Ameal Woods traveled to Texas with $42,000 to buy trucking equipment in 2019. North Carolina driver Jerry Johnson flew to Arizona with $39,500 to buy a truck in 2020. And Louisiana scrap-metal hauler Kermit Warren flew to Ohio in 2021 with $28,000 to buy a tow truck. Officers intercepted all three men, seized their cash, and attempted to keep it without charging anyone with a crime.
Civil forfeiture invites abuses like these. As long as law-enforcement agencies can self-fund through aggressive enforcement, anyone who carries cash will remain vulnerable.
Wesley Hottot is a senior attorney and Daryl James is a writer at the Institute for Justice in Arlington, Va.