WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 914

Relating to repealing civil asset forfeiture provisions and establishing criminal asset forfeiture in this state.

89th Legislature (2025) Introduced by Brian Harrison and 1 co-sponsor

HB 914 eliminates civil asset forfeiture in Texas, requiring criminal conviction before the state can seize property, reducing law enforcement seizure authority and government revenue.

Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
#assets(s0416) #billblackwoodlawenforcementmanagementinstituteoftx(v0332) #commissiononlawenforcement #texas(v1064) #contraband(s0006) #criminalassetforfeiture(s0179) #civilremedies&liabilities(i0065) #countygovernment--employees/officers(i0095) #courts--general(i0160) #courts--prosecutingattorneys(i0165) #criminalprocedure--general(i0208) #electronicinformationsystems(i0311) #lawenforcement(i0510) #publicsafety #departmentof(v0251) #propertyinterests--personalproperty(i0600) #propertyinterests--realproperty(i0595)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 914

Legislative bill overview

HB 914 proposes repealing Texas's civil asset forfeiture laws and replacing them with a criminal asset forfeiture system. Under this framework, law enforcement could only seize property after a criminal conviction, rather than the current system that allows seizure based on suspicion alone. The bill represents a significant shift in how the state handles asset forfeiture proceedings.

Why is this important

Civil asset forfeiture has been criticized for enabling property seizures without criminal charges or convictions, sometimes affecting innocent owners. Texas generates substantial revenue through forfeitures ($80+ million annually), and this change would substantially reduce government seizure authority while theoretically increasing due process protections. The shift would also impact state and local law enforcement budgets that rely on forfeiture proceeds.

Potential points of contention

  • Revenue impact: Law enforcement agencies and municipalities depend on forfeiture funds for operations; eliminating civil forfeiture could strain budgets and create political opposition from police departments
  • Crime-fighting effectiveness: Opponents may argue that requiring criminal conviction first weakens law enforcement's ability to disrupt drug trafficking and organized crime by freezing assets during investigations
  • Victim compensation concerns: Some argue civil forfeiture helps compensate crime victims; criminal-only forfeiture might reduce available restitution sources

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.