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 62 results
A drug conviction can banish a noncitizen from the United States without regard to any rehabilitation or family ties. In addition, drug violations may torpedo a person’s chances of obtaining a visa, a green card, or citizenship. When should a criminal defense attorney get an immigration attorney involved?
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.
The concept of “zero tolerance” within the criminal justice system is nothing new. Zero-tolerance policies allow for a quick and easy method of criminalization that is contrary to an effective and moral criminal justice system.
Coalition letter to California Assemblymember Ed Chau regarding disparities and discrimination, abuse, accuracy, information sharing, and other issues in the proposed bill AB 2261 on facial recognition technologies.
Amy Kimpel and James Chavez explain how to get non-U.S. citizen clients (both those with legal status and those who are undocumented) out of custody and how to keep them out. Their article will inspire defense advocates to fight for pretrial release for non-U.S. citizen clients and will provide legal ammunition for the battle.
When a criminal defense attorney sees a drug or drug-related charge alleged against a noncitizen client, the attorney should immediately think of immigration consequences. The main defense strategies for drug cases are as follows, in order of preference: (1) avoiding a drug conviction entirely through dismissal or negotiation; (2) if a drug conviction is unavoidable, avoid an aggravated felony; (3) plead to a substance that is not federally controlled; or (4) create a vague record of conviction as to the substance if the state law is overbroad.
Congress ostensibly created the “S” Visa program to promote national security by incentivizing foreign nationals to provide information to deter terrorist attacks. Does the program work as intended?
Comments to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding proposed amendments to the sentencing guidelines.
Letter to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding proposed amendments to the sentencing guidelines.
Comments to the U.S. Sentencing Commission on proposed 1997 Emergency Amendments.
Letter to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding proposed 1997 Amendments.
Coalition letter to members of the House regarding legislation that would redefine "criminal gang" to include people not involved in those activities yet in danger of deportation and other immigration penalties (see Criminal Alien Gang Member Removal Act (H.R. 3697, 2017)).
Brief for Amicus Curiae National Association Of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of the Respondent.
Argument: Administrative proceedings do not guarantee participants the assistance of counsel, the privilege against self-incrimination, the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, and various other protections that apply in a criminal trial. For these reasons, administrative proceedings do not typically preclude parties from relitigating any fact decided in the agency hearing at a subsequent criminal trial. The government’s prosecution of a noncitizen for unlawful reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 is a notable departure from this general rule. Due process requires that § 1326 defendants be afforded some meaningful opportunity to obtain judicial review of the proceeding that is the foundation for the government’s prosecution. The Court should therefore allow Respondent to challenge the validity of his removal order in the criminal proceedings, even though he has not satisfied the requirements set forth in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d).
