Colorado Enacts Civil Forfeiture Reform: First State to Guarantee Legal Counsel in Civil Cases

The Institute for Justice has released the latest edition of Short Circuit, a weekly roundup of federal court rulings. Among the highlights is significant civil forfeiture reform in Colorado.

Colorado Passes Landmark Civil Forfeiture Reform Bill

With near-unanimous bipartisan support, the Colorado General Assembly this week passed HB26-1250, a civil forfeiture reform bill that closes a longstanding loophole in Colorado law. The previous statute allowed property to be forfeited without a criminal conviction.

The bill also makes Colorado one of the first states in the nation to grant forfeiture defendants the right to an attorney in civil cases. Alasdair Whitney, legislative counsel at the Institute for Justice, stated:

"Even after significant reforms in recent years, Colorado's civil forfeiture laws still permit the government to permanently confiscate property without a criminal conviction. This bill closes that loophole for good, and it also makes Colorado the first state in the nation to grant property owners the right to an attorney in the forfeiture proceeding, just like there is in criminal court."

Short Circuit Podcast Update

The latest episode of the Short Circuit podcast features a discussion on former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore and his alleged frequent visits to a shopping mall, as well as other legal curiosities.

Retroactive Laws and Constitutional Interpretations

New York’s Chancellor Kent (1811) once wrote: "It is a principle in the English common law, as ancient as the law itself, that a statute, even of its omnipotent parliament, is not to have a retrospective effect."

However, New York’s highest court ruled in 2025 that retroactive application is permissible, and the Second Circuit affirmed this stance in 2026, deeming such laws constitutional.

Labor Unions Sue Federal Government Over Columbia University Grants

The American Association of University Professors and the American Federation of Teachers filed a lawsuit against the federal government to restore grants withheld from Columbia University. The unions sought a preliminary injunction but lost and appealed to the Second Circuit. While the appeal was pending, the unions and the federal government reached a settlement, and the unions withdrew their claims, mooting the case.

The Second Circuit ruled that the denial of the preliminary injunction should be vacated because the parties stipulated that the plaintiffs did not cause the mootness. A dissenting opinion argued that the plaintiffs may have contributed to the mootness.

Retailers Face Lawsuit Over Digital Tracking Practices

Bass Pro Shops and Cabela’s use JavaScript code on their websites to track user interactions, including mouse movements, clicks, scrolls, keystrokes, and text entries. This data is used to create digital "fingerprints" of online shoppers.

A group of aggrieved shoppers filed lawsuits across the country, which were consolidated in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The court dismissed the claims for most plaintiffs who merely browsed the websites. However, the Third Circuit ruled that two plaintiffs who made purchases—a camp chair and a belt—had standing to proceed. The court likened this practice to the common-law tort of "intrusion upon seclusion."

Voiceprint Authentication and Illinois Law

John Hancock routes customer calls through Amazon and another tech company, which authenticate callers using biometric voiceprints. Customers filed a lawsuit alleging that Illinois law prohibits collecting voiceprints without consent.

After navigating state and federal courts, the Third Circuit concluded that Illinois’s biometric privacy law includes an exemption for financial institutions. This exemption allows the tech companies to invoke the provision when authenticating customers.