Showing 1 - 3 of 3 results
NACDL Amicus Letter in GTMO Habeas Counsel Access Litigation (August 2012)
NACDL urges this Court to grant Petitioners' motions challenging the Government's Memorandum of Understanding Governing Continued Contact Between Counsel/Translator and Detainee Following Termination of the [Guantánamo] Detainee's Habeas Case. NACDL also encourages this Court to hold that Judge Hogan's Protective Order continues to apply to Petitioners, and that the Government may not condition Petitioners' access to counsel on counsel's submission to the new MOU.
Comments on a Proposed Amendment to add Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 62 (February 2022)
Comments to the Judicial Conference of the United States Practice & Procedure Committee regarding a proposed amendment to define how federal courts should navigate an emergency suspension of rules (new Criminal Rule 62), such as those posed by COVID-19 and directed by the CARES Act (H.R. 748, 2020).
Federal Defenders of New York v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
Brief for Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Plaintiff-Appellant.
Argument: For two weeks, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) and Warden Herman Quay denied inmates at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn (“MDC”) access to counsel and confined them to their cells with no light, little to no heat in the dead of winter, and no access to essential medical treatments. The District Court held that only the inmates themselves could bring suit to remedy the situation. This case presents a question of prudence not standing. The Federal Defenders should have the ability to enforce the right to counsel. The effective assistance of counsel is central to the functioning of our adversarial system. Assistance of counsel is impossible without attorney-client access. The Federal Defenders have strong incentives to protect the right to counsel. The Federal Defenders are an ideal candidate for enforcing the right to counsel.