Rockwall County Sheriff Harold Eavenson believes so strongly in his ability to seize private citizens’ property without charging them with a crime that he recently laughed with the president of the United States about destroying a Texas state senator’s career for opposing him. That senator’s offending behavior? Promoting the constitutional due process rights of hardworking, law-abiding Texans.

The sheriff’s complaint centers on a bill in the Texas Legislature, Senate Bill 380, that would require law enforcement agencies to secure a criminal conviction before the government could seize somebody’s property. Under civil forfeiture, it does not matter if the owner is never charged with a crime, let alone convicted of one.

SB 380, one of several recent proposals to reform forfeiture, draws on model legislation from the Institute for Justice and American Legislative Exchange Council. Both organizations and a broad conservative coalition have worked with state and local leaders to empower law enforcement to prosecute criminals while protecting the civil liberties of innocent citizens.

The Institute for Justice’s "Policing for Profit" report gave Texas a D+ rating for the ease with which law enforcement can use forfeiture against innocent people — combined with agencies’ ability to profit from 70 to 100 percent of forfeiture proceeds. The state also has some of the worst transparency laws nationwide, earning a D from the Institute for Justice’s Forfeiture Transparency & Accountability report card for broad lack of disclosure requirements and widespread obstacles to public accountability.

Civil forfeiture permits law enforcement to seize private property — on the flimsiest suspicion that it was somehow involved in some crime somewhere at some point in time — and then charge the property itself with a crime. Owners are not entitled to a lawyer to defend their belongings even though forfeiture procedures are perilously complex and a single mistake could lead to the permanent loss of an innocent person’s property. And worse: Civil forfeiture requires innocent property owners to prove their property’s innocence.

To deny the harsh reality of civil forfeiture, government officials often claim it is merely a tool to seize illicit drugs or attendant profits and to undermine international criminal cartels. But this claim begs the question at issue: Without a criminal conviction — or even criminal charges — how can the government know who is guilty?

Sheriff John Aubrey of Jefferson County, Kentucky, ignored this question in favor of the drug war myth in telling President Trump: "People want to say we’re taking money without due process. That’s not true. We take money from dope dealers… They make it political and they…make up stories."

Eavenson mocked the Texas lawmaker’s attempt to pass criminal forfeiture with a similar note: "The cartel would build a monument to him in Mexico if he could get that legislation passed."

Who will build monuments to the thousands of law-abiding Americans who lost homes, vehicles, businesses or life’s savings to civil forfeiture?

There is nothing "made up" about the stories of civil forfeiture’s many innocent victims. The tour manager for a Christian rock band who was on his way home to Dallas did not make up the seizure of more than $53,000 by officers from Muskogee County, Oklahoma, because of a busted tail light. A Texas state audit also did not make up then-Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins appropriating $80,000 in forfeiture funds for personal use — abuse that pending reforms would also curtail.

Despite law enforcement support, 84 percent of Americans now oppose civil forfeiture. After conservative-controlled governments in Nebraska and Ohio implemented criminal forfeiture laws last year, 12 states now require criminal convictions before law enforcement can permanently confiscate private property. Indiana, home of Vice President Mike Pence, is also considering reform. Texas could — and should — lead the way on an avalanche of nationwide reform to safeguard Americans’ property rights.

Due process is no laughing matter. Requiring criminal conviction for forfeiture is a constitutional requirement for a free state that respects the rule of law and cherishes the Texas Constitution and the Constitution of the United States.