This Report outlines current legal statutes that criminalize abortion and the impact overturning Roe v. Wade would have on laws to prosecute and incarcerate those providing, receiving, or assisting with abortions. It details the risk that, without protections provided by Roe v. Wade, many states can and will continue to pass laws that further inflame the national crisis of overcriminalization and mass incarceration. [Released August 2021]

NACDL: Jury Trials Not Safe Until COVID-19 Pandemic Under Control [Released June 2020]

NACDL's Fourth Amendment Advocacy Committee carefully and comprehensively studied issues concerning the current United States Postal Service Mail Covers regime following the revelations in The New York Times investigative report in connection with the 2014 U.S. Postal Service audit of the program. The concerns raised by this program and its operation fall squarely within NACDL's long history of advocating for the vitality of Americans' privacy and Fourth Amendment rights -- in the courts, in the legislatures, in executive agencies, and in the public arena. [Released April 2015]

The ‘trial penalty’ refers to the substantial difference between the sentence offered in a plea offer prior to trial versus the sentence a defendant receives after trial. This penalty is now so severe and pervasive that it has virtually eliminated the constitutional right to a trial. To avoid the penalty, accused persons must surrender many other fundamental rights which are essential to a fair justice system. [Released July 2018]

The ‘trial penalty’ refers to the substantial difference between the sentence offered in a plea offer prior to trial versus the sentence a defendant receives after trial. This penalty is now so severe and pervasive that it has virtually eliminated the constitutional right to a trial. To avoid the penalty, accused persons must surrender many other fundamental rights which are essential to a fair justice system. [NYSACDL & NACDL] [Released March 2021]

In the wake of the severe cuts to the provision of indigent defense services during sequestration in 2013, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) created a Federal Indigent Defense Task Force to examine the federal indigent defense system. The mission included an assessment of the level of independence afforded to the Office of Defender Services and consideration of whether reforms are necessary to ensure adherence to the ABA’s Ten Principles of a Public Defense Delivery System. [Released September 2015]

The explosive growth of misdemeanor cases is placing a staggering burden on America's courts. Defenders across the country are forced to carry unethical caseloads that leave too little time for clients to be properly represented. As a result, constitutional obligations are left unmet and taxpayers' money is wasted. [Released April 2009]

The integrity of the criminal justice system relies on the guarantees made to the actors operating within it. For the accused, the guarantee of fair process includes not only the right to put on a defense, but to put on a complete defense. The U.S. Supreme Court recognized the importance of this guarantee over 50 years ago, in Brady v. Maryland, when it declared that failure to disclose favorable information violates the constitution when that information is material. This guarantee, however, is frequently unmet. [Released November 2014]

The Right to Counsel in State Courts

This 50-state Survey of Right to Counsel Standards documents how states decide when a qualifying individual charged with criminal wrongdoing is entitled to receive appointed counsel. Some states only appoint counsel in cases of actual incarceration following conviction, while others mandate appointed counsel based solely on the fact that a defendant has been charged with a crime. Other states fall between these standards and appoint counsel when a sentence of incarceration is authorized or likely to be imposed following conviction. [Released October 2016]

This 50-State Survey of Financial Eligibility Guidelines for Assigned Counsel documents how states decide who is “too poor” to hire a lawyer. The survey looks at how states define “indigency” and whether or not that definition is consistent with ABA standards for providing defense services. It identifies which states rely on the Federal Poverty Guidelines when determining eligibility for assigned counsel, and explains the origin of the Federal Poverty Guidelines and how they cannot accurately predict who is “too poor” to hire a lawyer. [Released March 2014]

This report documents the unreasonably low rates of compensation paid to private attorneys who represent indigent defendants in state courts. The lack of adequate funding restricts the pool of attorneys willing to represent indigent defendants and creates conflicts of interest for attorneys by encouraging them to limit the amount of work they perform on a case for an indigent client. [Released March 2013]

How Data-Driven Policing Technologies Entrench Historic Racism and 'Tech-Wash' Bias in the Criminal Legal System

This NACDL Predicative Policing Task Force Report (1) calls attention to the rapid development and deployment of data-driven policing; (2) situates data-driven policing within the racialized historical context of policing and the criminal legal system; (3) makes actionable recommendations that respond to the reality, enormity, and impact of data-driven policing; and (4) suggests strategies for defense lawyers in places where data-driven policing technology is employed.

Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Criminal Justice System

This is a critically important and inclusive examination of the profound racial and ethnic disparities in America's criminal justice system, and concrete ways to overcome them. This conference report prepared by Consultant Tanya E. Coke is based upon a multi-day, open and frank discussion among a distinguished group of criminal justice experts – prosecutors, judges, defense attorneys, scholars, community leaders, and formerly incarcerated advocates. [Released July 2013]

In 2007, NACDL established a Problem-Solving Courts Task Force to examine the operations of courts such as drug and mental health courts. The Task Force was charged with conducting a thorough analysis of these courts, specifically focusing upon the ethical implications for the defense bar and the constitutional implications for society at large. The culmination of this project is a comprehensive report and recommendations that for the first time provide the perspective of the nation’s criminal defense bar. [Released September 2009]

Review Texas pretrial statutes, case law, and practices, and gain new insights and practice points, in order to best advocate for your client. [Released May 2020]