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 - 6 of 6 results
Panel from the 2020 Presidential Summit and Sentencing Symposium, co-hosted with the Georgetown University Law Center American Criminal Law Review
Letter to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding the economic crime package and other proposed amendments.
Letter to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding proposed amendments pertaining to diminished capacity and theft, fraud and tax loss tables.
Presented by Michael L. Perlin
This training is supported by Grant No. 2013-MU-BX-K014 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance.
Brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellant (on petition for rehearing)
Argument: Rehearing is warranted to preserve the clarity and integrity of circuit precedent because the District Court’s decision to remove Juror 9 was inextricably intertwined with Juror 9’s self-declared status as “odd man out” in deliberations. The District Court failed to make the required factual findings to support “good cause” removal for mental or physical incapacity. The District Court made no factual finding that Juror 9 had a mental incapacity that precluded him from continuing to deliberate. The District Court made no factual findings that could support the dismissal of Juror 9 for physical incapacity.
