I was reading into the Civil asset forfeiture laws and they date back to to 1600's actually. From my reading the real problems in modern times started with the passing of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984. That law allowed local law enforcement to share in the assets sized setting up a big reason to look for any asset to sieze. It was all done in the name of the "War on Drugs." Some states have passed some modicum of reform but it's still a major problem and IMO a violation of our constitutional rights. There are no laws that say you can only carry so much cash but if you have a lot of cash on you and have a brush with the law they can seize it because they say they suspect it was from or for illegal activity and just keep it. You don't need to be even charged with a crime. I still can't figure out how that is even close to legal but it happens all the time.The roots of the law probably go back to the anti-racketeering efforts from Prohibition, which might explain why laws like that, at least, don't plague Canada. For us it was a way to put mobsters in jail without having to do the hard work of catching them committing actual crimes. But it was still pretty limited regulation and then they re-legalized alcohol. Then in the 1970s right as everyone was panicking about junkies returning from Vietnam there was this senator from New Jersey who wanted to look tough on crime and he found a bill that was meant to attach to this old anti-racketeering law. He picked it up, dusted it off, and powered it through Congress. He didn't mind that it caused a lot of problems for society's lowest rungs and he didn't mind that it gave the government a reason to never terminate one of our worst policies since slavery, because at least he got to say he was tough on crime. He did a similar thing in the 90s too, in response to all the additional crime his bill created since the 70s. It makes perfect sense, really, once you know the history.
Baseball got cancelled but I am making the ribs.