Raleigh Cops Criticized for Federal Forfeiture Funds

Equitable sharing program allows police to seize cash and property without criminal convictions, sparking debate over reform.

Published on Feb. 13, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

An investigation by WRAL Investigates has revealed that the Raleigh Police Department has been receiving significant federal forfeiture funds through the Department of Justice's equitable sharing program, drawing criticism from civil rights advocates and legal experts who argue the program creates incentives for policing for profit and undermines state-level protections for property owners.

Why it matters

The equitable sharing program allows state and local law enforcement agencies to circumvent stricter state-level forfeiture laws by partnering with federal agencies, raising concerns that it could undermine important safeguards for property owners. Critics argue the program creates a perverse incentive for police to seize assets for financial gain rather than public safety.

The details

According to public records, Raleigh has led the state in federal seizures in recent years, with forfeiture dollars being used to purchase police equipment like tasers, ammunition, rifles, and rented vehicles. The police department has defended the program, stating that it "contributes to making Raleigh a safer community" and is run "professionally, lawfully and in a manner consistent with sound public policy." However, civil rights advocates and legal experts have suggested state-level reforms, such as banning federal adoptions, routing forfeiture revenue to the state general fund or schools, and tightening reporting rules.

  • The Department of Justice publishes annual asset forfeiture reports that list equitable sharing payments and other totals. The FY2025 reports were updated on January 26, 2026.
  • In February 2026, federal prosecutors filed a forfeiture notice on the home and $69,000 seized from a Raleigh firefighter and his wife following an Alcohol Law Enforcement probe.

The players

Raleigh Police Department

The local law enforcement agency that has been receiving significant federal forfeiture funds through the Department of Justice's equitable sharing program.

John Guze

A policy analyst at the John Locke Foundation who warned that federal equitable sharing rules do not require charging a property owner, which he said can create tempting conditions for abuse.

Keith Stone

The Nash County Sheriff who defended the equitable sharing program, stating that "There's no profit in policing" and that it helps cover gear costs and free up budget dollars for training and other needs.

Institute for Justice

A national civil rights law firm that has promoted policy ideas to reform the equitable sharing program, such as banning federal adoptions, sending forfeiture revenue into the state general fund or to schools, and tightening reporting rules.

North Carolina lawmakers

State legislators who could potentially close the federal workaround by passing legislation to reform the equitable sharing program.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We must not let individuals continue to damage private property in San Francisco.”

— Robert Jenkins, San Francisco resident (San Francisco Chronicle)

“Fifty years is such an accomplishment in San Francisco, especially with the way the city has changed over the years.”

— Gordon Edgar, grocery employee (Instagram)

What’s next

The debate over the equitable sharing program is expected to continue, with potential updates to Department of Justice guidance, local budget decisions, and possible state legislative action to reform the program.

The takeaway

The Raleigh Police Department's use of federal forfeiture funds has sparked a renewed debate over civil asset forfeiture and the equitable sharing program, with critics arguing that the program creates incentives for policing for profit and undermines important safeguards for property owners. This case highlights the need for greater transparency and stronger protections in the forfeiture process.