Republicans and Democrats are upset over Attorney General Jeff Sessions  controversial plans to increase civil asset forfeiture. The Department of Justice is stepping up efforts to seize property and money suspected of being used in a crime or obtained through illegal activity. That whole  innocent until guilty  thing was just thrown out the window.Local officials would be able to pull the feds into an investigation in order to ease the process of seizing assets from criminal suspects, even if they are not charged with a crime. This would allow law enforcement to take property without proving a crime occurred.JUST IN: DOJ new asset forfeiture policy   police can seize property from people not charged w/crime even in states where it's been banned. pic.twitter.com/P8K0g80m4E  Paula Reid (@PaulaReidCBS) July 19, 2017Sessions issued an order that authorized,  federal adoption of all types of assets seized lawfully by state or local law enforcement under their respective state laws . . . whenever the conduct giving rise to the seizures violates federal law. This move is so bad that even Darrell Issa is against it. This is a troubling decision for the due process protections afforded to us under the Fourth Amendment as well as the growing consensus we ve seen nationwide on this issue,  Issa said, according to Politico.  Ramping up adoptive forfeitures would circumvent much of the progress state legislatures have made to curb forfeiture abuse and expand a loophole that s become a central point of contention nationwide. Criminals shouldn t be able to keep the proceeds of their crime, but innocent Americans shouldn t lose their right to due process, or their private property rights, in order to make that happen. Rep. Justin Amash weighed in calling it a move  backward. This policy takes us backward. Congress must step up to protect the property of Americans from a government that keeps stealing from them. https://t.co/62t4tKLZHz  Justin Amash (@justinamash) July 17, 2017Mike Less isn t happy about this either.JUST IN: DOJ new asset forfeiture policy   police can seize property from people not charged w/crime even in states where it's been banned. pic.twitter.com/P8K0g80m4E  Paula Reid (@PaulaReidCBS) July 19, 2017Conservatives are upset.This is awful. https://t.co/YpYJ8BTWW7  Instapundit.com (@instapundit) July 19, 2017How conservative. https://t.co/JeGb1j9gla  Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) July 19, 2017Small government and libertarian minded conservatives should be outraged by this. It's bad policy and bad principles. https://t.co/gyW8749ODJ  Rory Cooper (@rorycooper) July 19, 2017Civil asset forfeiture for people not charged with a crime is a Constitutional outrage. This is raw statism. https://t.co/7m312luBLc  Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) July 19, 2017Indefensible. Totally incompatible with a free society. License to turn law enforcement into Moscow traffic cops. https://t.co/WWlxXIKGDY  Seth Mandel (@SethAMandel) July 19, 201784 percent of Americans oppose civil asset forfeiture. Among those is Justice Clarence Thomas who delivered harsh criticism in March of the civil forfeiture system, expressing doubt over the constitutionality of the process in which police seize cash, cars and other property that they suspect have ties to crime without going through a criminal procedure, Forbes reported.This isn t a Democrats vs. conservatives partisan issue. In fact, it s one thing both sides oppose. But it s good for local law enforcement officials, who see it as a lifeline for cash-strapped agencies who can profit from the seizures.But congrats, Mr. Sessions, for getting both sides to agree on an important issue against you.Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images.