NACDL's 19th Annual State Criminal Justice Network Conference
August 17-19, 2020 | Held Virtually
Marsy's Law 

NACDL opposed Marsy's Law, a sweeping victims' rights constitutional amendment, in North Carolina.

NACDL opposed Marsy's Law, a sweeping victims' rights constitutional amendment, in Nevada.

NACDL opposed Marsy's Law, a sweeping victims' rights constitutional amendment, in Kentucky.

NACDL opposed Marsy's Law, a sweeping victims' rights constitutional amendment, in Georgia.

NACDL opposed Marsy's Law, a sweeping victims' rights constitutional amendment, in Florida. 

NACDL opposed Marsy's Law, a sweeping victims' rights constitutional amendment, in Oklahoma.

NACDL hosted a National Advocacy Call on Developing Legislation on Wednesday, April 12, 2017 focused on how state advocates can help stave off the aggressive proponents of Marsy's Law legislation. 

NACDL talking points on Marsy's Law. It is important to remember the audience when targeting messages. While lawmakers have the time and the will to study policy implications, the general public will only react to simple, clear, and concise ideas. For example, point four and point six above will most likely have more impact with an everyday person, while points one and two will be of more interest to legislators.

 Brief for National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellees.

Argument: The right “to reasonable and timely notice of and to be present at all public proceedings involving the criminal or delinquent conduct” has impaired the administration of justice and cost counties and states millions of dollars. The right “to reasonable protection from the accused or any person acting on behalf of the accused” has led to absurd results in pretrial release decisions. The codification of “respect for the victim’s . . . privacy” and the right “to reasonable protection from the accused” has made it more difficult for law enforcement to solve crime and left the public lacking critical information about criminal activity.

Brief for National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners.

Argument: The dramatic impact that Marsy’s Law would have on Pennsylvania’s criminal justice system is not mere speculation. Other states have adopted nearly identically vague and broad constitutional amendments, which have resulted in substantial harm not only to criminal defendants, but also to the administration of the criminal justice system. This amicus brief summarizes the substantial burdens that Marsy’s Law has imposed in other states where it has gone into effect. The right “to reasonable and timely notice of and to be present at all public proceedings involving the criminal or delinquent conduct” has cost counties and states millions of dollars and congested court dockets. Marsy’s Law states have struggled to deal with the financial impact of the notice provision. The docket congestion caused by the notice provision has caused intolerable delays in proceedings. The right “to reasonable protection from the accused or any person acting on behalf of the accused” has led to absurd results in pretrial release decisions. The right to “full and timely restitution” will take money from the courts. The codification of “respect for the victim’s…privacy” and the right “to reasonable protection from the accused” has made it more difficult for law enforcement to solve crimes and left the public lacking critical information about criminal activity.

Marsy's Law Model Constitutional Amendment