Federal forfeiture laws assume guilt and allow the government to place temporary restraining orders on property prior to any adjudication of guilt. An individual would lose his right to dispose of that property without any court making a determination that the property is subject to seizure and ultimately to disposal via the forfeiture process.
In many cases the police can take away your property and money if you are suspected of a crime and you might never get it back, even if you're never charged. This seems like an obvious violation of due process, but judges have ruled that this is needed to fight the war on drugs. This is just not right.
No, federal forfeiture laws do not violate due process, because the person always has a right to a hearing. The person can get their day in court if they want it. They can call witnesses and they can defend their actions. This is lawful court process that takes constitutional rights into account.
I do not believe federal forfeiture laws violate due process. If this was the case the Supreme Court would have already seen cases addressing this issue. Forfeiture laws seem to work and they are rarely contested with success. Apparently this system as proven successful and its use should be continued.