A Georgia man won a legal battle against the federal goverment after the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) seized thousands of dollars from him at the Atlanta airport because he looked “suspicious.”
Brian Moore Jr. was about to catch a flight to Los Angeles in March 2021 when DEA agents stopped him after “witnessing what they believed to be suspicious behavior,” court documents state.
They questioned him and eventually obtained his consent to search his bag, which contained $8,500 in cash. They seized the cash and let Moore board his flight without charging him with a crime.
“They told me that I looked suspicious, and they were just going to take my money based off the fact that I look suspicious,” Moore told WSB-TV. “I hadn’t done anything wrong; I wasn’t doing anything wrong.”
The agents would claim they suspected the cash was tied to illicit drug activities. However, Moore, an aspiring music artist, was planning to use that money to finance a photoshoot and music video in L.A.
Moore hired an attorney and sued the government in hopes of reversing the seizure.
After more than a year of litigation, the government asked the federal court to dismiss the case with prejudice and eventually returned Moore’s $8,500.
But by the time the case was resolved, Moore had spent more than $15,000 in legal fees. He sought help from the Institute for Justice to appeal his case to a federal appeals court.
“It costs money to defend your property against civil forfeiture—in Brian’s case it cost almost twice as much as the value of the property—and those who successfully fight the government’s attempt to take their property deserve to be made whole,” attorneys for the Institute for Justice wrote. “If they are not compensated for the cost of successfully litigating their case, even more property owners will simply give up rather than contest this government abuse. And when the government takes property from innocent people, it should be the one to pay.”
Last month, a federal appeals court ruled the government had to pay Moore’s legal expenses, as well.
“I felt a little bit of justice finally,” Moore recalled.
Dan Alban, the attorney who filed Moore’s appeal, said civil asset forfeiture is often driven by profit since agencies can hold onto the money they seize.
“That gives them a strong incentive to engage in seizures and forfeiture of cash so that they can supplement their budget and spend that money on virtually whatever they want,” Alban said.
