NACDL submits this comment in response the Bureau of Prisons’ Proposed rule that would significantly change the regulations regarding the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program. We oppose these proposed changes, which are harsh and inequitable and will harm not only people who are incarcerated, but their families and dependents.

Comments on rules & regulations and letters submitted to the Department of Justice on behalf of NACDL

Letter from NACDL Executive Director Norman L. Reimer and NACDL affiliates' leadership to FBI Director James Comey regarding the FBI's policy on recording custodial interrogations, especially for those suspected of felony offenses.

We submit these comments on the interim rule, published by BOP on December 5, 2013 … on sentence reduction for extraordinary and compelling reasons. The first provision codifies existing practice by which, when considering a prisoner for reduction in sentence, the General Counsel solicits the opinion of the United States Attorney in the district in which the prisoner was sentenced. The second provision provides that the Bureau’s “final decision is subject to the general supervision and direction of the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General.” Neither provision should be adopted.

After reviewing the “Recommendations to the Attorney General Regarding the Use of the Term ‘Reasonable Scientific Certainty’” (Recommendations), the NACDL wholly agrees with and supports all three recommendations of the subcommittee which, taken together, would end the use of the terms “to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty” or “to a reasonable degree of (discipline) certainty” by those employed and appearing on behalf of the Department of Justice. 

NACDL commends the Department of Justice for conducting an independent root cause analysis on testimonial errors by microscopic hair analysts and for conducting a “quality review” of other disciplines to see if similar “testimonial statements” were made in other comparison disciplines. NACDL has … seen firsthand how pervasively examiners exaggerated their conclusions in hair comparison cases. Thus, this initiative by DOJ, along with its commitment to making both efforts “deliberative” and “transparent” is most welcome.

NACDL commends the DOJ for developing uniform standards for testimony and lab reports generated by the FBI, the ATF and the DEA. NACDL further commends the DOJ for releasing these standards for public comment, particularly for comment from the scientific community. … Thus, this initiative by DOJ, along with its commitment to making both efforts “deliberative” and “transparent” is most welcome. In the spirit of that commitment to a deliberative and transparent process, NACDL offers these comments on the proposed “Uniform Language for Testimony and Reports.” 

NACDL has worked collaboratively with the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Innocence Project, and the pro bono law firm Winston & Strawn on the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review since 2012, and, as a result, NACDL has seen firsthand how pervasively examiner opinions exceeded the limits of science in hair comparison cases. Thus, this initiative by DOJ, along with its commitment to a process that is “deliberative” and “transparent” is most welcome. In the spirit of that commitment, NACDL offers these comments.

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) commends the Department of Justice (DOJ) for developing proposed uniform standards for testimony and lab reports generated by the Federal Bureau of lnvestigation (FBI), the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives, and the Drug Enforcement Administration. NACOL further commends the DOJ for releasing these standards for public comment, particularly for comment from the scientific community.

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) commends the Department of Justice (DOJ) for its previous efforts to improve the reliability of forensic evidence in the criminal justice system. NACDL submits this comment to urge the DOJ to continue to advance and improve the reliability of forensic science as outlined below, including: reinstatement of a national commission on forensic science; implementation of a Forensic Science Discipline Review; and development of scientific standards for testimony and reports with input from independent scientists and statisticians.

Coalition letter to Department of Justice Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer and Securities and Exchange Commission Director of Enforcement Robert Khuzami regarding enforcement of and forthcoming guidance for the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

We appreciate the opportunity to comment in response to the Department of Justice’s recent Proposed Rule interpreting the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) to permit individuals placed on home confinement during the COVID-19 emergency to remain on home confinement once the emergency ends. Commenters include attorneys who represent people impacted by this Proposed Rule, non-profit organizations that work with them, and organizations dedicated to the rule of law.

We write today to urge the Department of Justice (DOJ) to quickly complete an updated Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Next Generation Identification System (NGI) as part of a broader effort to examine the goals and impact of NGI. The previous PIA on NGI’s face recognition component dates back to 2008. Since that time the program has undergone a radical transformation—one that raises serious privacy and civil liberties concerns.

We represent a wide range of privacy and human rights advocates, technology companies, and trade associations that hold an equally wide range of positions on surveillance reform. Many of us have differing views on exactly what reforms must be included in any bill reauthorizing USA PATRIOT Act Section 215, which currently serves as the legal basis for the NSA’s bulk collection of telephone metadata and is set to expire on June 1, 2015. Our broad, diverse, and bipartisan coalition believes that the status quo is untenable and that it is urgent that Congress move forward with reform.