Doj Seizure: When the Department of Justice Can Seize Property

A seizure occurs when a federal agent—such as those from the FBI, DEA, or USMS - physically takes possession of property or freezes a financial account. This action removes the owner’s ability to use or transfer the asset. In 2026, the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) serves as the primary custodian for these assets, managing everything from cryptocurrency wallets to multi-million dollar real estate holdings.

It is critical to distinguish between these two distinct legal phases:

• Seizure: 

The physical act of taking the property. It is temporary and based on probable cause.

• Forfeiture: 

The legal judgment that permanently strips the owner of their title. Forfeiture can be administrative, civil, or criminal.

For a federal asset seizure to be lawful, the government must have "probable cause" to believe the property is:

Contraband: Property that is illegal to possess.

Proceeds: Money or assets gained directly from a crime (the "fruits").

Instrumentalities: Property used to facilitate a crime (e.g., a car used for smuggling).

Generally, the DOJ must obtain a seizure warrant from a federal judge. However, "administrative" seizures can occur without a prior warrant if the property is seized at the time of an arrest or under specific search warrant exceptions. In 2026, the DOJ follows strict Pre-Seizure Planning Policy Guidelines to ensure that seizing an asset(especially a commercial enterprise) is worth the government's cost of maintenance.

Cash remains the most frequently seized asset. As of 2026, the DOJ typically requires a minimum of $5,000 for a cash seizure unless the owner is being criminally prosecuted, in which case the threshold may drop to $1,000.

This includes homes, land, vehicles, and luxury goods. For real estate, the DOJ generally requires at least 20% net equity (or $20,000) before initiating a seizure, as the government does not wish to manage "underwater" properties.

Cryptocurrency is a top enforcement priority in 2026. The DOJ utilizes specialized units to track and seize virtual currencies involved in investment fraud, money laundering, and darknet marketplace transactions.

The DOJ can seize property during an ongoing investigation before any indictment is unfiled. This is often done to prevent the "dissipation" of assets while the government builds its case.

• Criminal Forfeiture: 

An in personam action against the individual. The property is forfeited as part of the defendant's sentence after a conviction.

• Civil Forfeiture:

 An in rem action against the property itself. The government sues the asset (e.g., United States v. $50,000 in Cash). No criminal conviction is required, though the government must still prove the property’s connection to a crime.

The government must provide personal written notice to all known interested parties within 60 days of the seizure. This notice specifies the deadline for filing a claim - usually 35 days from the date the notice was sent. Additionally, notice must be published online or in a newspaper for at least three consecutive weeks.

If no one files a claim by the deadline, the agency can proceed with an administrative forfeiture, permanently taking the property without ever going before a judge. However, if a timely claim is filed, the administrative process stops, and the case must move to federal court as a judicial forfeiture.

The primary way to contest a seizure is to file a formal Claim. This must be done under oath and identifies your interest in the property. Once filed, the DOJ must either return the property or file a civil complaint in court within 90 days. Alternatively, you may file a Petition for Remission or Mitigation, which is essentially an appeal to the DOJ's mercy, often used when the owner admits the property was involved in a crime but seeks its return based on hardship.

• Innocent Owner Defense: 
• Arguing that you were unaware of the illegal use of the property and did not consent to it.
• Lack of Probable Cause: 
• Scrutinizing the government’s evidence to show the initial seizure was unwarranted.
• Proportionality Defense: 
• Arguing that the forfeiture is "grossly disproportionate" to the gravity of the offense under the Eighth Amendment.