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 51 results
NACDL, with its diverse membership of 10,000 spanning state, federal, and military practice, wishes to express its views on preferred Commission priorities. We concur with other advocates and stakeholders that current sentences are excessively long, and certain sentencing factors disproportionately affect racial minorities within the criminal legal system. Whatever issues the Commission determines to prioritize, these flaws should be foremost in considering potential amendments.
NACDL respectfully submits the following comments on whether recently promulgated amendments should be included in the Guidelines Manual as changes that may be applied retroactively to previously sentenced defendants. These comments address Amendment 1 (relating to acquitted conduct). NACDL also supports retroactivity for Parts A and B of Amendment 3 and Part D of Amendment 5 and adopts the comments of the Federal Defenders on those amendments.
The National Association of Defense Lawyers (NACDL) respectfully submits the following comments on these important proposed amendments.
The undersigned groups are pleased to see that the U.S. Sentencing Commission has made the comparing of sentences imposed in cases disposed of through trial versus plea one of its priorities for the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2024. As groups with significant experience examining the trial versus plea sentencing disparity, we respectfully request a meeting with Commissioners or staff or both who are working on this important issue.
The National Association of Defense Lawyers (NACDL) respectfully submits the following comments on the Commission’s possible policy priorities for the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2024.
NACDL hereby responds to the Commission’s request for comment on the retroactive application of Part A of the 2023 Criminal History Amendment which limits, and, in some cases, eliminates status points under USSG § 4A1.1(d), and Part B, Subpart 1 of this year’s Criminal History Amendment, which amends USSG § 4C1.1 to provide for a two-level downward adjustment for “zero-point offenders.” NACDL endorses retroactive application for both provisions without limitation.
NACDL is pleased to see the U.S. Sentencing Commission proposing amendments the Sentencing Guidelines that seek to address the unfair practice of allowing acquitted conduct to be considered as relevant conduct under Sentencing Guideline Section 1B1.3.
NACDL supports the Commission’s proposed amendment to §1B1.13, with some suggested modifications, and supports Option 3 to (b)(6). After reviewing the Commission’s recent hearings on this proposed amendment as well as the submitted written testimony, NACDL focuses its comments on proposals (b)(5), (b)(6), and (b)(4).
Comments on rules & regulations and letters submitted to the U.S. Sentencing Commission on behalf of NACDL
We respectfully submit the following comments on the Commission’s tentative priorities for the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2023, with a particular focus on the implementation of the First Step Act of 2018. … In this current cycle, we welcome the Commission’s focus on the decarceration focus of the First Step Act, as well as all efforts to reduce the rate of incarceration in federal cases, the size and racial disparities of our federal incarcerated population, and the guideline rigidity that discourages or limits the recognition of each offender’s humanity and redemptive potential.
Comments to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding post-Booker decisions, and specifically related to anabolic steroids. Includes testimony from and article by NACDL member Rick Collins.
NACDL hereby responds to the Commission’s request for comment on retroactive application to Amendment 3 from this year’s amendment cycle, which decreased the drug table set forth in USSG §2D1.1 by two-offense levels across all drug types and without limit to any specific offender characteristics. NACDL joins with the Federal Defenders and the Practitioners Advisory Group in whole-heartedly endorsing retroactivity without any limitation.
On behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, I am grateful to the Commission for promoting dialogue on these important issues and strongly urge retroactive adoption of the elimination of the residual clause.
The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) welcomes the opportunity to submit comments on the Commission’s Proposed Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines, dated December 19, 2016 (the “Amendments”). … NACDL adopts the Federal Defender’s comments, and here offers additional comments regarding these topics.
NACDL President Jim Lavine's written statement to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding proposed amendments to the sentencing guidelines, particularly in relation to the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (S. 1789).