Civil asset forfeiture system hits low-income people of color harder

Reputed mob figure Casey Szaflarski's attempt to reclaim his seized 2006 Toyota Highlander hybrid — which was reported in a Jan. 23 Sun-Times article — highlights the inequities in Illinois' civil asset forfeiture system. But Szaflarski has lawyers to help him navigate the Kafkaesque system to get his car back — most people don't — and because it's a civil matter, one isn't provided for them.

Unlike Szaflarski, many people who have vehicles seized in Illinois do not have a criminal case pending against them. Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts found that, in Chicago alone, law enforcement seized 1,694 assets in 2021 valued at over $8 million. The study showed that 47% of people observed in proceedings for civil asset forfeiture cases were Black and 36% were Hispanic or Latino. Most forfeitures were connected to drug possession, driving without a license or fleeing or eluding law enforcement — none of which are violent crimes. Civil asset forfeiture has a disparate impact on overpoliced communities in Illinois, with the burden of permanent forfeiture falling most frequently on those unable to afford a lawyer and navigate the court system.

Although civil asset forfeiture law in Illinois provides for defenses and procedural safeguards to protect property owners against wrongful forfeiture, these processes are complicated and fall short of the due process rights provided in criminal court, and many property owners struggle to assert their rights.

Civil asset forfeiture in Illinois does not require a criminal conviction, only a finding that law enforcement had probable cause to seize the property under an assertion that the property is related to an alleged criminal act. Forfeitures proceed even when the charges are dropped, and even when a seizure has no basis in law, overly complex processes fail to provide sufficient due process and permanently deprive Illinoisans of vehicles and other assets that they need to survive.

As the Sun-Times article and the Chicago Appleseed study report, civil asset forfeiture often targets assets of low or moderate monetary value, but these assets are often critically important to their owners. Civil asset forfeiture should have no home in Illinois.

Claire Johnson Raba, assistant law professor, University of Illinois Chicago, and member, End Policing for Profit

Pretti didn’t break laws

I write with deep sadness over the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti during a protest against federal immigration operations in Minneapolis. What is troubling is how some have attempted to justify this killing based on lawful conduct and political rhetoric rather than constitutional standards.

Two constitutional rights are central to this discussion of the shooting in which two U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents fired their weapons. First, the First Amendment protects the right of citizens to observe and record government officials performing their duties in public spaces. Courts across the country have held that recording law enforcement, so long as it does not materially interfere with operations, is lawful civic oversight. Recording officers is not provocation or obstruction. It is a safeguard of accountability in a free society.

Second, the Second Amendment protects lawful firearm possession. Carrying a firearm pursuant to state law does not transform a citizen into a criminal or establish probable cause that they pose an imminent threat. Treating lawful carry as suspicious turns a constitutional right into an aggravating factor, something the Constitution does not permit.

Supreme Court precedent sets clear limits on the use of deadly force. In Tennessee v. Garner in 1985, the court held that law enforcement may use deadly force only when there is probable cause to believe a person poses an immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm. In Graham v. Connor in 1989, the court required that force be evaluated under an objective reasonableness standard based on the totality of the circumstances, not just the final seconds before force is used. More recently, Barnes v. Felix reaffirmed that courts may not isolate the moment of force while ignoring the actions that led up to it.

Reports indicate that Mr. Pretti was lawfully present, lawfully recording and lawfully armed. If those facts are confirmed, they do not justify lethal force under Garner, Graham or Barnes. Constitutional protections do not depend on political alignment or approval.

The way senior officials moved quickly to frame lawful conduct as criminal is disturbing. Including claims that carrying extra magazines is inherently suspicious or that calling for investigation amounts to siding with terrorists. Such rhetoric, made before any transparent inquiry, undermines due process and public trust.

This tragedy demands a principled application of constitutional limits on deadly force, not rushed conclusions shaped by fear or politics.

Matthew Slade, veteran and former village trustee, Durand

As a nurse, Pretti was trying to help

As a registered nurse for 50 years, I am in deep mourning for my fellow RN, Alex Pretti. Alex died in a horrific manner while trying to assist a woman who had just been attacked. He acted as nurses do, aiding others despite the setting, not only at work. Most nurses have assisted injured people in restaurants, on the street, after accidents or falls. Unfortunately, this caring nurse paid for his reaching out with his life. Many U.S. veterans will not receive his nursing care, as he was killed by a wild group of supposed law officers. I hope all Americans look at these deaths in Minneapolis for the tragedy they are and vote to honor their memory.

Patricia Warman, Des Plaines

Rise up after Pretti’s fatal shooting

I hope that a lasting effect of the latest killing in Minneapolis will be that, finally, there will be durable, widespread, public outrage against the Trump regime.

The public's ability to be outraged has been dulled by a continuous series of disturbing and illegal actions and by gaslighting by the regime as it attempts to substitute fiction for reality in the public's mind and to make the abnormal seem normal through repetition.

We must shake off the numbness that the regime is attempting to induce and respond loudly when lines are crossed. The White House will interpret anything less than broad, unambiguous disapproval as a green light, so citizens must show up for protests and not act like there is never a good time to discuss politics.

Some American voters bought President Donald Trump's line about getting rid of "the worst of the worst.” I'm not into "abolish" movements, but it increasingly looks like the only way that the regime can keep that "worst of the worst" promise is by getting rid of the existing, broken immigration enforcement agencies and their leaders and start over.

Curt Fredrikson. Mokena

Girls need to connect in real life

Screens are filling a gap, and that gap is real-life connection.

If it feels like screens dominate your child’s day, you’re not imagining it. Screen time challenges often become hardest to ignore over winter breaks and summer.

New research from Girl Scouts of the USA shows that nearly all surveyed girls — 97% — ages 5 to 13 spend time online. Those hours add up quickly. Almost half of girls — 43% — ages 8 to 13 spend three or more hours a day online outside of schoolwork, and more than half — 58% — of girls ages 5 to 7 are online daily.

The most interesting insight isn’t how often girls are on screens — it’s why. More than half — 56% — say they go online to fight boredom.

As girls age, they feel intensifying pressure to be online, particularly to avoid feeling left out of conversations, trends or online social moments. Interestingly, more than half of girls — 52% — also say they struggle to get their parents’ attention, because adults are on their own devices.

Behind every statistic is a girl with a developing sense of self and a growing need for peer connection. In my role as CEO of Girl Scouts of Greater Chicago and Northwest Indiana, I hear directly from girls who tell me that they want to feel seen, be heard and belong.

Girls desire safe spaces where they can show up as themselves, not as a curated version shaped by algorithms.

Growing evidence supports the power of outdoor experiences to give youth what they are missing. A recent New York Times article highlights studies showing that time outdoors improves attention, creativity and mood. These benefits mirror what we see every summer at camp. Without cellphones, girls collaborate, solve problems and build friendships face-to-face. Outdoor experiences foster independence, emotional resilience and a sense of belonging that can’t be replicated through a screen.

Technology can be a powerful tool for learning and creativity. However, balance matters, and real-world connections must remain at the center of their lives.

Girls aren’t spending too much time on their screens because they lack motivation or discipline. They are responding to boredom, pressure and a fundamental need to connect. When we provide meaningful alternatives rooted in nature and community, screens begin to lose their hold.

Real-world connection isn’t optional. It’s foundational for girls’ well-being and the health of our communities.

Nancy Wright, CEO, Girl Scouts of Greater Chicago and Northwest Indiana

Tax relief for private school parents

I am not Catholic, but I am sorry to hear of the recent Catholic school closings.

This should concern all of us. The schools are not closing because they are failing. They are closing because people can’t afford to pay for private education after they have already paid for public education. Two-thirds of our property taxes go for public education.

People will say that public education benefits everybody, so everybody should pay for it. No. Education benefits everybody. And better education benefits everybody better. When parents have choice in education, they will go to the school that they think provides better education.

I propose that parents should receive a tax deduction for the amount spent on private education up to the amount they would have spent on public education in their property taxes.

Why should parents have to pay twice for their kids’ education?

Larry Craig, Wilmette

Remind rural residents what SNAP cuts will do

Thank you to the Sun-Times' Elvia Malagón for her solid, somber warning about the impact curtailing SNAP benefits will have on Chicago's most vulnerable citizens. I would suggest she do a follow-up that details the crushing blow the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program cuts will leave on local economies, especially rural economies — you know, the precincts that voted overwhelmingly for the current president.

Every $1 spent on SNAP generates, on average, over $1.50. If these foolish and cruel cuts stand (eliminating $30 billion in farming revenue), rural communities can expect local economic activity to take a $46 billion hit, according to some estimates. They may have voted for the current president, but they are our neighbors. Giving them a heads-up is the neighborly thing to do.

Mark Lipscomb, McKinley Park

Old-school journalism

CBS News' Bari Weiss, a person with dubious credentials, demeans Walter Cronkite, stating he is a symbol of old thinking. He was "the most trusted man in America" for a reason. He spoke truthfully and accurately. He gave us a true picture. especially during the Vietnam War. We could use more like Cronkite today. Straight factual journalism — TV, radio or newspaper — is a goal. If that is old thinking, let's have more of it.

Philip S. Witt, Northbrook

So long, Soldier Field?

The Wigwam
The Chicago Coliseum
The Chicago Stadium
The International Amphitheatre
Comiskey Park

All are gone, and it is time for Soldier Field to join them.

Build a new stadium on the site, and keep the Bears in Chicago. Have a soldier museum in the new structure.

John Keating, Near North