Marine's Life Savings Seized Without Charges
Stephen Lara was driving to visit his daughters in California when Nevada Highway Patrol pulled him over. Despite never alleging any criminal activity, officers seized his entire life savings through a practice called civil asset forfeiture.
It took viral video coverage and front-page attention in The Washington Post before the government agreed to return his money just one day later. But Lara's case revealed a troubling pattern of police finding ways around state laws meant to protect citizens' property rights.
Court Slams Door on Federal Loophole
A recent ruling declared the practice of routing seizures through federal programs “ultra vires” (beyond legal authority).
Nevada police had been using a workaround: when state law prevented them from keeping seized property, they would hand it to federal agencies through the “equitable sharing” program in exchange for getting up to 80% back as a kickback.
While federal law offers Nevada the option to participate in equitable sharing, the state legislature never accepted this offer. Therefore, state police must follow Nevada's own stricter forfeiture rules.
The court's order broadly prohibits all Nevada law enforcement from participating in the federal equitable sharing program.
Big Money at Stake
The financial incentives behind these practices are staggering.
Between 2000 and 2019, state and local agencies collected over $68 billion through forfeiture programs nationwide. Most seizures targeted amounts under $1,000 – hardly the work of drug kingpins. The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department collected $1.9 million in a single year, while district attorney offices earned more than $250,000 through civil forfeiture in 2016.
Law enforcement agencies often depend on forfeiture money to pad their budgets – in some departments, it makes up over 20% of their funding.
The Fox Guarding the Henhouse
When lawmakers tried to reform forfeiture laws in response to Lara's case, the effort was blocked by then-Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro. At the time, Cannizzaro served both as a legislator and deputy district attorney – a dual role that created a naked conflict of interest.
In 2019, she killed at least 16 Democrat-sponsored criminal justice bills, including a bipartisan attempt to reform civil asset forfeiture. Many bills died without even getting a vote. The Nevada Supreme Court later ruled such dual service unconstitutional.
Both Cannizzaro and Senator Melanie Scheible subsequently resigned their positions in the Clark County District Attorney's office.
Even as the lawmaking prosecutors resigned, seven other Nevada legislators still held dual government positions across various agencies, including the Clark County School District, Clark County Public Defenders Office, Regional Transportation Commission, University of Nevada-Reno, Truckee Meadows Community College and Nevada State College.
Each of these positions raises similar constitutional concerns.
Constitutional Crisis Continues
The state constitution explicitly prohibits dual service.
Article 3, Section 1 states that:
“no persons charged with the exercise of powers properly belonging to one of these departments shall exercise any functions, appertaining to either of the others.”
As then-Nevada Supreme Court Justices Abbi Silver and Kristina Pickering wrote in dissent in a separate case filed in 2022:
“The Nevada Constitution’s separation of powers clause prohibits Senator Melanie Scheible, (D-Las Vegas) from serving as a legislator, passing laws and at the same time working as a prosecutor, in the executive branch, enforcing those laws. Therefore, the separation of powers clause forbids legislators who are promoting legislation on behalf of their constituents from concurrently acting as a prosecutor – executing criminal prosecutions through enforcement of state criminal laws,”
The ruling adds:
“This impingement is ‘repugnant to the constitution.’”
National Implications
The court's ruling could inspire similar challenges across the country, where police routinely use federal relationships to bypass state restrictions on civil asset forfeiture.
Thirty-six states have already reformed their forfeiture laws to provide greater property rights protections, but many law enforcement agencies continue finding ways around these reforms through federal partnerships.
For property rights advocates, these interconnected cases demonstrate how constitutional protections can erode when government officials wear multiple hats or find creative ways around state law.
While Lara recovered his savings after public outcry, his lawsuit seeking damages continues through the courts.
This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.