Renewed War on Drugs, harsher charging policies, stepped-up criminalization of immigrants — in the current climate, joining the NACDL is more important than ever. Members of NACDL help to support the only national organization working at all levels of government to ensure that the voice of the defense bar is heard.
Take a stand for a fair, rational, and humane criminal legal system
Contact members of congress, sign petitions, and more
Help us continue our fight by donating to NFCJ
Help shape the future of the association
Join the dedicated and passionate team at NACDL
Increase brand exposure while building trust and credibility
NACDL is committed to enhancing the capacity of the criminal defense bar to safeguard fundamental constitutional rights.
NACDL harnesses the unique perspectives of NACDL members to advocate for policy and practice improvements in the criminal legal system.
NACDL envisions a society where all individuals receive fair, rational, and humane treatment within the criminal legal system.
NACDL’s mission is to serve as a leader, alongside diverse coalitions, in identifying and reforming flaws and inequities in the criminal legal system, and redressing systemic racism, and ensuring that its members and others in the criminal defense bar are fully equipped to serve all accused persons at the highest level.
Showing 1 - 15 of 16 results
According to the government, the goal of forfeiture is to take the profit out of crime. The government seeks to take private assets – including cash and real property – that it claims constitute the proceeds of criminal activity. Steven L. Kessler discusses some of the basics every attorney should know about forfeiture.
The Human Toll of Civil Forfeiture presented by Jennifer McDonald and Dan Alban of Institute for Justice
Follow-up letter to the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure Advisory Committee on Civil Rules regarding the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000.
Letter to the U.S. Courts Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure Advisory Committee on Civil Rules regarding the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000.
President-elect Gerald B. Lefcourt, Asset Forfeiture Abuse Task Force co-chair E.E. (Bo) Edwards, Attorney David B. Smith, and Susan Davis' written statements to the House Judiciary Committee regarding Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 1997 (H.R. 1965).
Executive Director Norman Reimer's letter to the Ohio House Judiciary Committee regarding a proposal to eliminate the civil forfeiture process and rely only on criminal forfeiture and its requirements (HB 347, 2015).
Courts issue forfeiture money judgments against defendants despite the absence of statutory authority or due process protections. Defense counsel must continue to raise constitutional challenges until the Supreme Court speaks on the issue.
Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice & Procedure regarding proposed rule changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Asset Forfeiture Abuse Task Force co-chair E.E. (Bo) Edwards's testimony to the House Judiciary Committee regarding the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (H.R. 1916, 1995) and federal asset forfeiture programs.
Asset Forfeiture Abuse Task Force co-chairs E.E. (Bo) Edwards, David B. Smith, and Richard Troberman's written statement to the House Judiciary Committee regarding the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (H.R. 1916, 1995) and federal asset forfeiture programs.
Coalition letter to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies and House leadership regarding proposed amendments to the 2018 appropriations bill that would limit civil forfeiture expansion and protect property rights for those not charged or convicted of a crime (see H.R. 3354 (2017)).
Coalition letter to members of the House regarding proposed amendments to the 2018 appropriations bill that would limit civil forfeiture expansion and protect property rights for those not charged or convicted of a crime (see H.R. 3354 (2017)).
Coalition letter to House and Senate leadership and Congressional leadership regarding the overreach of federal civil forfeiture and its use before people are convicted of any offense, undermining the presumption of innocence.
Advocacy Call on Civil Asset Forfeiture
Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Appellees and Urging Affirmance.
Argument: Congress enacted the CAFRA fee provision, over the government’s objection, to ensure the availability of competent counsel for persons whose property the government seizes and seeks to forfeit. The Anti-Assignment Act does not apply to assignments of potential future CAFRA fee awards. The defense of a civil forfeiture case does not involve a claim against the government. Future, potential rights to recover statutory attorney fees are not claims against the government.
