H.R. 5212: Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2014
Before you vote › Federal bills
H.R. 5212: Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2014
113th Congress · introduced 2014-07-28 · Crime and Law Enforcement · Latest: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2014-07-28 · official record
- Who proposed it: Rep. Walberg, Tim [R-MI-7] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
- If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.
Official title
Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2014
Plain summary
Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2014 - Amends the federal criminal code to require the government to include in any notice required to be sent in a nonjudicial civil forfeiture proceeding under a civil forfeiture statute that the person receiving the notice may be able to obtain free or reduced rate legal representation. Requires the government, in a suit or action brought under any civil forfeiture statute for the civil forfeiture of property, to prove that the property is subject to forfeiture by clear and convincing evidence (currently, by a preponderance of the evidence). Provides that where a prima facie case is made for an innocent owner defense, the government has the burden of proving that the claimant knew or reasonably should have known that the property was involved in the illegal conduct giving rise to the forfeiture (currently, the claimant has the burden of proving that the claimant is an innocent owner). Places the burden on the government to show that the property owner should have had knowledge of the criminal activity by demonstrating that the property owner did not: (1) give timely notice to law enforcement of information that led the person to know the conduct giving rise to a forfeiture occurred; and (2) in a timely fashion, revoke or attempt to revoke permission for those engaging in such conduct to use the property or take reasonable actions in consultation with law enforcement to discourage or prevent the illegal use of the property. Directs the court, in determining whether the forfeiture was constitutionally excessive, to consider such factors as the seriousness of the offense, the extent of the nexus of the property to the offense, the range of sentences available for the offense giving rise to forfeiture, the fair market value of the property, and the hardship to the property owner and dependents (currently, the court is required to compare the forfeiture to the gravity of the offense giving rise to the forfeiture). Requires the Attorney General to: (1) specify, in the annual report on the Department of Justice Assets Forfeiture Fund, deposits from each type of forfeiture, identifying which funds were obtained from criminal forfeitures and which were obtained from civil forfeitures; and (2) assure that any equitable sharing between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and a local or state law enforcement agency was not initiated for the purpose of circumventing any state law that prohibits civil forfeiture or limits use or disposition of property obtained via civil forfeiture by state or local agencies.
Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.
What a vote does
A “Yea” vote
If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.
A “Nay” vote
If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.
PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).
What does this mean? (plain words)
Official text
Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2014
Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text
No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.
Limited to a few requests an hour per person.
The strongest published arguments
Arguments for (supporters)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Arguments against (opponents)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Alternatives
Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes
Officials and money
Sponsor: Rep. Walberg, Tim [R-MI-7] · 20 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
Cosponsors on this site
Cynthia M. Lummis (R-WY), Tom McClintock (R-CA), Henry C. "Hank" Johnson, Jr. (D-GA)
Sponsor's campaign money: Rep. Walberg, Tim [R-MI-7] reported raising $2.2 million (2025–2026). Details. Shown for context only; it does not mean any donor supported this bill.
No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.
Words on this page, explained (1)
- Statute
- A written law passed by a legislature. A statute can be changed by a later law; changing a constitution needs an amendment.
Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
- Congress.gov
- Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-113hr5212.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/113/hr>
Record fed-us-cong113-hr5212 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong113 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong113