XXX XXXXXX agency XX the X.S. XXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX interdiction efforts at both the XXXXX and XXXXXXX XXXXX by providing, "air and ground observation and reconnaissance, environmental assessments, intelligence XXXXXXXX and linguists, transportation and XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX" (XXXXXXXXX, 2012). XX addition, XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXX some civilian XXXXXXXX a variety of skills that can XX XXXXXXXX XX help in XXXXXXX-drug XXXXXXXXXX (XXXXXXXXX, XXXX).
3. XXXXXXX XXX controversial XXXXXX XXXXXXX XX law XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX as presented in your text. XX XXXX XX XXXXXXX the "drug XXXXXXX XXXXXXX", X.S. XXXXXXX XXXXX rulings, and the most XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XX XXXX-courier profiling methods.
XX help XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXX, drug-law enforcement XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX they XXXXXX, “drug XXXXXXX profiles”. The original XXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXX profiles was XX use it to identify XXXXX individuals who XXXX most likely to commit XXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX. The problem behind XXXX was that officers were open to XXXXX own perceptions XXXX choosing XXX travelers to XXXXXXX. XX United XXXXXX v. Van XXXXX (1977), XXXXX is the first case to XXXXXXX XXX drug XXXXXXX profiles, XXXXX XXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXX caused XXXXXXX agents XX have some XXXX XX suspicion. However, XX XXX court cases XXXX challenged, the XXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX became larger XXXXX ultimately allowed XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XX stop XXX XXXXXXXXXXX any XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XX air (Lopez, n.d.).
XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX from XXX XXXXXXXXXXX stems XXXX XXX fact XXXX some XXX enforcement officers created XXXXXXXX based on the XXXXXXXXXX’s race or origin XXXXXX than an XXXXXXXX XXXXXX. XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXX racial XXXXXXXXX, which XXXXXXXX officers stopping XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXX driver XXX XXX fit the social status. For example, an XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX male XXXXXXX an expensive XXXXXXX would XX stopped XXXX often XXXX a XXXXX male XXXXXXX the XXXX car. XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXX are XXXX officers who defend XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX claiming that African Americans, Latinos, XXXXXX and XXXXX minorities XXX XXXX likely to XX in possession of illegal drugs XXXX whites. XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX, XXXXX XXX XX viable XXXXXXXXXXX XXXX would make this claim XXXX. XXXXX a Justice Department directive in 2003, racial XXXXXXXXX was officially banned in XXX XXXXXXX agencies XXXX law enforcement (Levinthal, XXXX).
X. Give an overview of the XXX XXXXX XX forfeitures: criminal XXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX. XXXXXXX similarities and differences, how and when XXXX, and XXX XXXXXXXXXX or XXXXXXXXXXX used in each.
According to the X.S. XXXXXXXXXX of Justice (2017), there XXX XXXXXXXX three types XX XXXXXXX forfeitures XXXX include XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX, XXXXX judicial XXXXXXXXXX XXX administrative XXXXXXXXXX. Criminal forfeiture XXXXXX when XXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXX property or XXXX XXXXXX because of XXX relationship to XXXX XXXX of criminal XXXXXXXX. XXXXX XXXXX XX different with each XXXXXX their own XXXX XXX XX XXXXX XX the crime or crimes committed and XXX laws of XXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX in which XXX crime XXX XXXXXXXXX or where XXX XXXXXXXX is located. XX example XXXXX XX a XXXXX seizing a car that XXX used in the commission XX a XXXXX (Larson, 2018).
Civil forfeiture is like XXX criminal forfeiture, XXXXXXX, in a civil forfeiture, XXX XXXXXX XX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX the property only. Actions XXX XXXXX forfeiture must XXXXXXX XX a preponderance of the XXXXXXXX that a solid relationship between the property XXX XXXXXXX activity has occurred in order to XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXX (Larson, 2018). XX example XXXXX be monies believed to XX from XXXXXXX XXXXXXX drugs.
XXXXXXX XXXX of the civil XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XX administration XXXXXXXXXX (Larson, 2018). XXX XXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXX XXXXXX that an administrative XXXXXXXXXX XX, "an in XXX action that permits XXX XXXXXXX seizing XXXXXX XX XXXXXXX XXX property without XXXXXXXX involvement. XXX authority XXX a XXXXXXX XXXXXX to XXXXX an administrative forfeiture XXXXXX is XXXXX in the XXXXXX XXX XX 1930, XX U.S.C. § XXXX. XXXXXXXX that can be administratively forfeited XX XXXXXXXXXXX the XXXXXXXXXXX XX which XX prohibited; a XXXXXXXXXX XXXX to import, XXXXXXXXX, or store a XXXXXXXXXX substance; a XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX; or XXXXX property that XXXX not XXXXXX $500,000 in XXXXX" (Types XX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX, XXXX).
XXXXXXXXX
DEA XXXXXXXX, XXXXX & Local XXXX XXXXXX. (n.d.). XXXXXXXXX XXXX 08, XXXX, XXXX XXXXX://XXX.dea.XXX/XXX/taskforces.shtml
Larson, A. (2018, April XX). XXXXXX Law. XXXXXXXXX XXXX 09, XXXX, XXXX https://XXX.XXXXXXXXX.com/XXXXXXX/XXXXXXXX/XXXXXXXXXX.XXXX
Levinthal, X. F. (XXXX). Drugs, XXXXXXX, and XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX (XXX ed.). XXXXXX: Prentice Hall.
XXXXX, A. X. (n.d.). XXXXXXX of XXX Drug Courier XXXXXXX. Retrieved June X, 2018, XXXX XXXX://XXXXXX.XXX/XXXXX.php?option=XXXXXXXXXXX&XXXX=XXXXXXX&id=XXX:XXXXXXX-XX-XXX-drug2012&XXXXX=XXX&Itemid=241
Types XX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX. (XXXX, February X). Retrieved XXXX 9, XXXX, from https://XXX.XXXXXXX.gov/XXX/XXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXXXXX
United States v. Lewis, 556 F. 2d 385 - XXXXX XX Appeals, XXX Circuit XXXX