FAIR Act of 2026
- Bill Number
- H.R. 7638
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Crime and Law Enforcement
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-02-20: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Last Updated
- 2026-06-05T21:30:38Z
AI-Generated Summary
Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act of 2026 (FAIR Act of 2026) - H.R. 7638
Purpose
The bill aims to reform federal civil asset forfeiture laws—where the government seizes property suspected of involvement in crime without necessarily charging the owner with a crime—by strengthening due process protections under the Fifth Amendment (which protects against deprivation of property without due process of law). It eliminates nonjudicial forfeitures and raises standards for government seizures.
Key Provisions
- Eliminates nonjudicial forfeitures: All forfeitures must occur through judicial process in U.S. district courts; agencies cannot forfeit property administratively without court involvement.
- Tightens notice requirements: Government must identify and notify interested parties within 7 days of seizure (reduced from 60 days); claims must be filed within 30 days of seizure.
- Raises burden of proof: Government must prove forfeiture case by clear and convincing evidence (higher than previous "preponderance of the evidence" standard); for property used in crimes, must show substantial connection and owner's intent or willful blindness.
- Appointed counsel: Courts may appoint lawyers for claimants unable to afford one or where legal costs exceed property value.
- Innocent owner defenses: Strengthens protections; government bears burden to disprove innocent ownership by preponderance of evidence.
- Disposition of proceeds: Forfeiture proceeds go to the U.S. Treasury's General Fund, not agency slush funds; ends equitable sharing with states.
- Structuring reforms: Criminalizes structuring (breaking transactions to evade reporting) only if done "knowingly" with funds from illegitimate sources; requires probable cause hearing within 14 days for related seizures.
- Reporting: DOJ must report forfeiture deposits by type (civil vs. criminal).
- Applicability: Applies to pending/new proceedings and forfeitures after enactment.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- 18 U.S.C. § 983 (general forfeiture rules): Bans nonjudicial process; shortens timelines; elevates proof standards; adds judicial oversight for stays and hearings.
- Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 881): Removes options for civil disposition; directs proceeds to Treasury.
- 18 U.S.C. §§ 981, 983: Mandates Treasury deposit of proceeds; removes "grossly disproportional" language for remission (now just "disproportional").
- Tariff Act (19 U.S.C.): Ends federal transfers of forfeited property to states.
- 31 U.S.C. §§ 9705, 5324, 5317: Eliminates DOJ Asset Forfeiture Fund deposits from civil forfeitures; adds "knowingly" mens rea (guilty mind) to structuring; mandates quick hearings.
- 28 U.S.C. § 524: Cuts off civil forfeiture funding to DOJ operations/equitable sharing.
Potential Impacts
- Government agencies: Law enforcement (e.g., DOJ, DEA, FBI) loses quick, low-oversight seizures and dedicated funding; must litigate more cases, potentially reducing forfeiture revenue used for operations.
- Citizens: Greater protection for property owners (especially innocent ones) via faster notices, counsel, higher proof bars, and hearings; reduces risk of prolonged wrongful seizures without quick return.
- No direct international relations impact.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Property owners/claimants: Primary beneficiaries through enhanced rights and defenses.
- Innocent third parties: Easier to prove non-involvement (e.g., landlords, family members).
- Federal law enforcement agencies: Hindered by bans on administrative forfeitures and funding shifts.
- U.S. Treasury: Gains deposits from proceeds.
- States/local agencies: Lose federal "equitable sharing" of forfeiture proceeds.
- Courts: Increased caseload from mandatory judicial forfeitures and hearings.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Constitutional: Directly bolsters Fifth Amendment due process by requiring judicial oversight, higher evidentiary standards, and counsel, addressing criticisms of civil forfeiture as "guilty until proven innocent" for property.
- Legal: Shifts power from agencies to courts; may increase successful claimant challenges and property returns.
- Political: Bipartisan sponsorship (Republicans and Democrats); reflects ongoing reform debates on forfeiture abuse, potentially setting precedent for state-level changes without altering criminal forfeiture.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (3)
Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8], Rep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-5], Rep. Scanlon, Mary Gay [D-PA-5]
Recent Actions
- 2026-02-20: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2026-02-20: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2026-02-20: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2026-02-20: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2026-02-20: Introduced in House
- 2026-02-20: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act of 2026 — issued 2026-02-20 — PDF (15 pages)