Given the restrictions placed on civilian defense counsel, what are a criminal defense attorney’s duties to the client before a Military Commission at Guantanamo Bay under Military Order of November 13, 2001, “Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism,” 66 F.R. 57833 (Nov. 16, 2001), and its implementing instructions issued April 30, 2003?

On behalf of a diverse group of public interest and other advocacy organizations, we strongly urge you to support amendments from S.1686, the Judiciously Using Surveillance Tools In Counterterrorism Efforts (JUSTICE) Act, during tomorrow’s Patriot Act reauthorization mark if and when they are offered. We commend Chairman Leahy and Senators Cardin and Kaufman for introducing the USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization Act and recommend adding additional privacy protections during your scheduled markup.

We strongly urge you to oppose the inclusion of sections 1112 and 1113 in H.R. 1, the continuing resolution for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2011. Sections 1112 and 1113 of H.R. 1 would impose a complete prohibition on the transfer of Guantanamo detainees to the U.S., even for purposes of prosecution in federal criminal court, and effectively end the resettlement or repatriation of detainees cleared by the United States for transfer to foreign countries.

We write to express our concern about your recent call to restrict the constitutional rights of individuals in the United States suspected of terrorist activity by seeking to codify or expand the “public safety exception” to Miranda v. Arizona. Current law provides ample flexibility to protect the public against imminent terrorist threats while still permitting the use of statements made by the accused in a criminal prosecution. Weakening Miranda would undercut our fundamental Fifth Amendment rights for no perceptible gain.

Flake-Schiff letter to AG Alberto Gonzales regarding the Terrorist Surveilannce Program

We are organizations that believe that our nation’s surveillance laws can effectively target terrorists without jeopardizing the rights of innocent United States persons. We are very concerned that the recently enacted Protect America Act of 2007 may be used to justify the warrantless interception of any international communications by U.S. persons without any restriction on the subsequent review and data mining of the metadata concerning those calls or the content of the communications themselves.

We urge you to oppose S. 2977, which was recently introduced by Senator Graham (R-SC) and would prohibit the Department of Justice from using funds to prosecute the alleged planners or conspirators in the September 11, 2001 attacks in regular Article III federal courts. These are the same federal courts where the Department of Justice regularly tries and convicts defendants charged with international terrorism crimes. 

Concerns with Revisions to the Military Commissions Act of 2006 in the Senate-Passed Version of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2009 … The undersigned organizations want to make clear both our opposition to resuming the use of military commissions to try terrorism suspects, and our concern with numerous provisions in the amendment to the MCA that we strongly urge you to consider. … military commissions would still be incapable of delivering on the twin goals of any effective judicial system: ensuring that justice is fair, and ensuring that justice is swift.

We urge the Judiciary Committee to amend the bill to make critically important improvements to Section 215 of the Patriot Act and to the material support statute. [referring to the USA PATRIOT Amendments Act of 2009 (H.R. 3845)]

Freedom of Information Act request: NACDL and the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law seek Department of Justice records concerning guidance on use of the “public safety exception” to Miranda v. Arizona in terrorism or national security investigations.

Oppose Any Motion to Recommit on the Intelligence Authorization Act (HR 2701) That Would Bar Prosecution of Some Terrorism Defendants in Federal Criminal Courts ... The possible motion to recommit would needlessly tie the President’s hands in resolving the problem of Guantánamo and disposing of cases in ways that comport with human rights principles and the rule of law. It would restrict the Obama administration’s ability to employ one of the most valuable counterterrorism tools available—criminal prosecutions in regular federal courts.

Opposition to the Purchase of the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Illinois — Unless Congress Also Enacts a Permanent, Statutory Ban on Using the Thomson Prison for Indefinitely Detaining Persons Without Charge or Trial, or for Holding Persons During Military Commission Trials or for Serving Sentences Imposed by Military Commissions

The undersigned civil liberties, human rights, and religious organizations write to oppose Rep. Jackie Walorski’s amendment to the House version of the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would prohibit the Defense Secretary from transferring any Guantanamo detainee to Yemen. The amendment is unnecessary, unwise, and unjust. We urge you to vote against it.

Beyond Guantánamo: Confronting the New Paradigm of Prevention in Domestic Terrorism Cases

The Latest Manifestation of NACDL’s Commitment to Reform and a Look Back at the 41 Reports That Preceded It and a Preview of the Next 3

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?