Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Petitioner and Urging Reversal.

Argument: The lower courts’ interpretation of "official act" violates principles that limit the scope of broadly worded federal criminal statutes. The statutes at issue are impermissibly vague if they cannot be construed to limit the scope of "official act."

Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Petition for a Writ of Certiorari.

Argument: The Court should grant the writ to reinforce key principles that restrain expansive interpretations of broadly worded federal criminal statutes. The Court should grant the writ to protect the Sixth Amendment right to an unbiased jury.

Amicus curiae brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and The Cato Institute in support of petitioner and urging reversal.

Argument: This Court has repeatedly applied the rule of lenity and other tools of statutory interpretation to limit prosecutors’ expansive applications of federal criminal statutes. This Court has required a clear statement from Congress before it will interpret a federal criminal statute to shift the federal-state balance in law enforcement. This case implicates the concerns that have caused this Court to interpret criminal statutes narrowly.

Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Appellant and Urging Reversal.

Argument: The District Court’s “Official Act” instruction improperly altered the federal-state balance without a clear statement from Congress. Ambiguous criminal provisions must be interpreted strictly against the government.

Brief of Amici Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Appellant’s Motion for Bail Pending Appeal.

Argument: The District Court’s “Official Act” instruction improperly altered the federal-state balance without a clear statement from Congress. Ambiguous criminal provisions must be interpreted strictly against the government.

Brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner.

Argument: A Hobbs Act conspiracy charge requires proof of an agreement to obtain property from a third party. The unambiguous meaning of the text enacted by Congress delineates the outer bounds of the Hobbs Act offense. The Court should not construe the Hobbs Act to intrude upon areas traditionally reserved to state law.