The Man Who Fought Chicago for His Cadillac—and Never Got It Back
Spencer Byrd's case helped spark reforms and a federal lawsuit, but he died before seeing justice.

I first met Spencer Byrd in a Chicago diner one afternoon in 2018. Sitting across from me, he told me an outrageous story about how he'd been battling the city government for two years to get his 1996 Cadillac DeVille out of impound.
Byrd's story would help lead to reforms to Chicago's impound program and an ongoing federal class action lawsuit against the city. But despite fighting in court for nearly a decade, he never got his Cadillac back. I learned this week that Byrd died in February, while that lawsuit was still pending.
I've often considered it something—if not fate, then at least fortuitous—that Byrd and I connected.
In 2017, a staffer at the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois told me about Chicago's punitive vehicle impound program and put me in touch with a local attorney doing pro bono work with people whose cars had been seized. The attorney gave me the phone numbers of five or six clients who he thought would be interested in talking to me.
Byrd was the only one who responded, and the story he told me was a doozy: He was a carpenter and a part-time auto mechanic in Harvey, Illinois. He said he was giving a client a lift in his car one evening in June 2016, when he was pulled over by Chicago police and searched. Byrd was clean, but his passenger, a man he says he'd never met before, had heroin in his pocket.
The police released Byrd without charging him with a crime, but his car was seized and dually claimed by both the Cook County State Attorney's Office and the city of Chicago. Essentially, his car was being claimed by two distinct layers of government. Even after a state judge declared Byrd innocent in the county's asset forfeiture case against his car, Chicago refused to release the vehicle until Byrd paid thousands of dollars in impound fines and fees under the city's municipal code, which didn't include a defense for innocent owners.
Byrd couldn't afford to pay the fines, and he'd never be able to without his car or the carpenter tools locked in the trunk. The car previously belonged to his late brother, and on some court forms, he listed it as a family heirloom.
"I can't understand it, because I'm almost to the point of being homeless," Byrd told me. "If I was found guilty or in the wrong, do what you gotta do, but I was blind to the fact."
Then at the diner, a small journalistic miracle occurred. Byrd slid over a large binder with every court filing and document in his case, even a letter from his local carpenter union vouching for him. He quite literally dropped the story in my lap. I took pictures of all of the documents, which allowed me to build a two-year timeline of Byrd's Kafkaesque battle with Cook County and the city of Chicago.
Thanks to Byrd's folder, the story I eventually wrote was one of the best of my career.
Other investigations by WBEZ, and ProPublica Illinois also showed how Chicago's massive impound program regularly ensnared innocent owners and low-income residents, soaking them in thousands of dollars of fines and storage fees, regardless of their ability to pay.
In 2019, Byrd became one of the lead plaintiffs in a civil rights lawsuit filed by the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm, against Chicago. The suit alleged that the city's impound scheme violated the Illinois and U.S. Constitution's protections against excessive fines and unreasonable seizures, as well as due process protections.
Under pressure, Chicago partially reformed its vehicle impound program in 2020, including adding a defense for some innocent owners.
Not to discount the work of the many other plaintiffs, attorneys, and reporters who exposed Chicago's impound racket, but it occurs to me that part of this was all set in motion because Byrd fought for two years before I met him, with barely any resources, and refused to accept a farce where Chicago could take his car for a crime he'd been declared innocent of by a state judge.
Sometimes I imagined that one day Byrd would win his car back, and I'd fly to Chicago to take a picture of him reunited with his beloved Cadillac. That would have been a good story. I had professional self-interest in that of course, but Byrd also was also, as far as I could tell, a decent guy.
"I have no background in drugs, no felonies, no nothing, just been working hard all my life," Byrd told me at the diner. "I believe the city just wants you to throw money at them and not fight for what's right, and I'm fighting for what's right."
In March, a federal judge ruled in favor of Chicago and dismissed the Institute for Justice's lawsuit challenging the city's impound program. The Institute for Justice says it plans on appealing the decision.
"Chicago's impound program has violated residents' rights for far too long," Institute for Justice senior attorney Diana Simpson said in a press release. "Innocent owners should not face sky-high fines and fees for others' actions, and the city should not treat its car owners as a revenue source. We look forward to appealing this ruling and tackling head-on cases approving of this unconstitutional system."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
This case is but one example of the outstanding work that the Institute for Justice does in fighting Big Government on behalf of the people of our Nation.
Amen.
We can only hope that the 7th circuit reverses the district court or barring that the Supreme Court finally ends this shit. For Mr. Byrd this will obviously be too little too late.
"In 2017, a staffer at the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois told me about Chicago's punitive vehicle impound program and put me in touch with a local attorney doing pro bono work with people whose cars had been seized."
So, how come all those saints in the ACLU didn't take the case?
Didn't Mr. Byrd give enough in the way of donations to that shit-eating organization?
It was true in the sixties, and it is still true now; you can't fight city hall.
(but you can burn it down)
He said he was giving a client a lift in his car one evening in June 2016, when he was pulled over by Chicago police and searched.
Why was he pulled over, and why was he and his passenger then searched?
We'll never know.
Hopefully not just Driving While Black.
Dude, you clown world bozo - try ACTUALLY READING the article before running straight to the comments section. He straight up tells you.
He said he was giving a client a lift in his car one evening in June 2016, when he was pulled over by Chicago police and searched. Byrd was clean, but his passenger, a man he says he'd never met before, had heroin in his pocket.
And there's a thing called Google.
Spencer Byrd, a Chicago resident and part-time auto mechanic, was giving a client whose car was broken a ride home when the Chicago police stopped him for having a broken turn signal. Chicago police searched Spencer and his client and, while they found nothing on Spencer, they discovered a bag of heroin in the client’s pocket.
https://ij.org/client/spencer-byrd/
FFS.
Also, this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mjPc_Fcef4#t=123
Broken turn signal...cannot roll my eyes hard enough. That warranted a full bodily search of all humans in the car?
Too bad Mr. Byrd also didn't have a dog in the car that police could shoot, right AT?
Ah, pulled over for a pretext.
Broken turn signal...cannot roll my eyes hard enough.
The dude's a mechanic.
That warranted a full bodily search of all humans in the car?
If he consented to it, sure. And I'm reasonably certain that he did, because had he not - this fact would have been a central and glaring point to Ceej's argument on the subject.
See, that's the thing with Reason when they write about stuff like this. You have to look at what they DON'T tell you. They love to skip over details that are unfavorable to their narrative, and talk about them very very generally, usually trying to get past it as quickly as they can to move on to more narrative-friendly details.
eg. "he was pulled over by Chicago police and searched" - AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE GOING TO SAY ON IT, MOVING ON
Too bad Mr. Byrd also didn't have a dog in the car that police could shoot, right AT?
If we're talking about a pit bull, sure. I never - ever - object to the shooting of a pit bull.
Like the police knew he was a mechanic when they decided to manufacture a reason to pull him over.
Like the police would not have found a way to arrest them for being uncooperative if they refused consent to search.
Your shtick is always the same AT. Comply or die, or end up in a cell if you are lucky.
Because they could. Police manufacture reasons.
Something about a broken turn signal, driver said it wasnt broken, but FYTW