NACDL frequently writes to members of Congress, the Department of Justice, and the president on fourth amendment issues. These letters have been collected and are available for download by clicking on the titles below.

The undersigned organizations representing a diverse universe of constituents who care about civil rights and civil liberties write in support of S. 417, the State Secrets Protection Act. This bill strikes an appropriate balance between allowing plaintiffs to seek justice through our judicial system and protecting information that would endanger national security if released to the litigants or the public. We urge the bill’s immediate passage.

NACDL  advocated for legislation to bolster the due process rights of youth in Maryland.

Concerns with Revisions to the Military Commissions Act of 2006 in the Senate-Passed Version of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2009 … The undersigned organizations want to make clear both our opposition to resuming the use of military commissions to try terrorism suspects, and our concern with numerous provisions in the amendment to the MCA that we strongly urge you to consider. … military commissions would still be incapable of delivering on the twin goals of any effective judicial system: ensuring that justice is fair, and ensuring that justice is swift.

Unfortunately, the Feinstein amendment [to the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2013 (S. 3254)] fails to address a central concern raised in the public debates: the specter of the military being used to police our streets and detain individuals on U.S. soil. The bill also unintentionally reinforces the false and discriminatory notion that due process protections are only afforded to some – not all – persons within the United States. 

Beyond Guantánamo: Confronting the New Paradigm of Prevention in Domestic Terrorism Cases

Letters to the Maryland State Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee and House of Delegates Judiciary Committee regarding proposed legislation to protect the due process rights of youth and end the practice of automatically charging youth in adult criminal court.

Letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland regarding former Attorney General William Barr's ruling in Matter of Thomas and Matter of Thompson, 27 I. & N. Dec. 674 (AG 2019) changing DOJ and DHS policy so state courts can only affect immigration sentencing if related to underlying criminal proceedings and not the immigration case.

Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Defendants’ Joint Motion to Dismiss.

Argument: It is axiomatic that due process principles restrict criminal liability to violations of laws of which the accused has fair notice. Criminal liability may not attach to conduct that is beyond the scope of an unambiguous criminal proscription— and all close calls must be resolved in favor of the defendant. Where a criminal violation is not supported by clear, existing authority—or where it is even a close question—the reviewing court should dismiss the criminal indictment under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12(b)(3)(B)(v). Doing so ensures fairness by avoiding the grave harms associated with criminal prosecution—which frequently cannot be remedied by eventual reversal on appeal—while preserving the Department’s ability to pursue the prosecution if a reviewing court sees the law differently. These principles strongly support dismissal of the indictment here. Existing authority does not support criminal liability on the basis of a no-solicitation agreement, which no court has ever held to be a per se violation of the Sherman Act. Allowing the prosecution to proceed in these circumstances would be inconsistent with existing law and the Department’s own policy statements—and would thus violate due process. 

Written Statement of Norman L. Reimer, Executive Director National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Before the House Committee on the Judiciary Over-Criminalization Task Force Re: “Mens Rea: The Need for a Meaningful Intent Requirement in Federal Criminal Law”

Coalition letter to the House Judiciary Committee regarding legislation to address the judicial discretion that allows for factoring into sentencing conduct acquitted by a jury, as proposed in Prohibiting Punishment of Acquitted Conduct Act of 2021 (H.R. 1621).

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan’s letter to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure, regarding federal disclosure obligations and suggesting an amendment to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

NACDL President Chris Adams' comments to Education Secretary Miguel Cardona regarding the Office for Civil Rights' review of amendments made in 2020 to regulations guiding TItle IX investigations and proceedings.

NACDL President Drew Findling's letter to Education Secretary Betsy DeVos regarding proposed regulations for campus hearings pursuant to Title IX funding, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance Docket No. ED-2018-OCR-0064.

Comments to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed amendments to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.