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 59 results
Comments to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules regarding proposed amendments to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
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.
NACDL adopts a report and recommendations to address flaws through reform to the mail cover program.
NACDL adopts a report and recommendations on law enforcement searches of digital evidence.
The Board of Directors adopted model legislation to protect individual privacy against unwanted governmental intrusion through the use of drones
Does the pursuit of a fleeing misdemeanor suspect always qualify as an exigent circumstance that permits warrantless entry into a home? In Lange v. California, the Supreme Court held that it does not.
Nearly every case involves a cell phone or an online account. Laws on device and account searches are continuing to evolve, as courts reconsider old doctrines that do not fit with the realities of the digital age. Below, find sample motions on suppressing emails, passcodes, and other electronically stored information.
Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Federal Rules of Evidence.
Comments to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed changes to procedures in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice & Procedure regarding proposed rule changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The rise of electronic devices like laptops and smartphones brought new questions to the border search doctrine. Are electronic devices like vehicles, which require no reasonable suspicion to warrantlessly search at the border? Or are digital devices more like invasive searches of a person? Does the type of search – manual or forensic – require different levels of suspicion to execute?
Defense attorney Elliot Abrams discusses a Fourth Circuit case that rejects the use of filter or taint teams after a law office search. He uses this case to develop a road map for lawyers to follow to protect client confidences in response to subpoenas or seizures of client files by the government.
“Surreptitious DNA sample” refers to the collection and analysis of DNA from a person without the person’s knowledge and without coercion. For example, the police may swab a suspect’s DNA from a discarded cigarette. Oded Oren outlines an argument for suppressing the DNA information extracted from the analysis of surreptitiously obtained DNA rather than suppression of the DNA itself or the physical object from which it was obtained.