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 - 3 of 3 results
Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Andracos Marshall's Petition for Rehearing En Banc.
Argument: This case presents an issue of exceptional importance because it denies all defendants the use of innocent assets to hire counsel if they have been subject to any post-conviction forfeiture. The published panel opinion conflicts with the Supreme Court’s decision in Luis v. United States.
Brief of Amici Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, and Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Petitioner.
Argument: The government's attempt to restrain untainted assets circumvents an essential limit on the forfeiture power. The government's interest in forfeiture does not outweigh a defendant's right to spend her own money on counsel of choice.
Brief of Criminal Defense Attorneys (NACDL and FACDL) as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner (On Petition for Writ of Certiorari).
Argument: The Sixth Amendment right to counsel demands a strict construction of section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i)’s heightened intent requirement. The reasoning of Caplin & Drysdale and Monsanto is flawed. In those cases, the Court construed the Sixth Amendment as offering no constitutional protection to the payment of counsel of choice with the proceeds of alleged, but not yet proven, criminal conduct. This case represents an ideal vehicle to determine whether the validity of the decisions should be reconsidered, as Justice Kagan, in Luis v. United States, 136 S. Ct.1083, 112 (2016) (Kagan, J., dissenting), suggested might now be appropriate.