Criminal Law Reform
Featured
Arizona
Oct 2023
Criminal Law Reform
Racial Justice
Fund for Empowerment v. Phoenix, City of
Fund for Empowerment is a challenge to the City of Phoenix鈥檚 practice of conducting sweeps of encampments without notice, issuing citations to unsheltered people for camping and sleeping on public property when they have no place else to go, and confiscating and destroying their property without notice or process.
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2023
Criminal Law Reform
McElrath v. Georgia
Does the Double Jeopardy Clause bar an appellate court from reviewing and setting aside a jury鈥檚 verdicts of acquittal on the ground that the verdict is inconsistent with the jury鈥檚 verdict on other charges?
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2023
Criminal Law Reform
Pulsifer v. United States
This case involves the interpretation of a federal law that allows defendants to avoid mandatory minimum sentences for certain nonviolent drug crimes, allowing judges to impose sentences tailored to their individual circumstances.
Texas
Jul 2021
Criminal Law Reform
Prisoners' Rights
Sanchez et al v. Dallas County Sheriff et al
Decarceration has always been an emergency, a life and death proposition, but COVID-19 makes this effort intensely urgent. The 吃瓜直播 has been working with our partners to litigate for the rights of those who are incarcerated and cannot protect themselves because of the policies of the institutions in which they are jailed.
All Cases
141 Criminal Law Reform Cases
Court Case
Jan 2025
Criminal Law Reform
Crowe v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
On December 20, 2024, CLRP, along with 吃瓜直播-DC and Jenner & Block, filed a federal lawsuit against the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and its Director for incarcerating thousands of people longer than the law allows under the First Step Act.
Explore case
Court Case
Jan 2025
Criminal Law Reform
Crowe v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
On December 20, 2024, CLRP, along with 吃瓜直播-DC and Jenner & Block, filed a federal lawsuit against the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and its Director for incarcerating thousands of people longer than the law allows under the First Step Act.
New Jersey
Jan 2025
Criminal Law Reform
Romano v. Warden, FCI Fairton (Amicus)
This case challenges the federal government鈥檚 authority to remove people from their homes, jobs, and loved ones and remand them to federal prison absent any alleged violation or process.
Explore case
New Jersey
Jan 2025
Criminal Law Reform
Romano v. Warden, FCI Fairton (Amicus)
This case challenges the federal government鈥檚 authority to remove people from their homes, jobs, and loved ones and remand them to federal prison absent any alleged violation or process.
California
Jan 2025
Criminal Law Reform
Wilford v. Engleman (Amicus)
This case challenges the federal government鈥檚 authority to remove people from their homes, jobs, and loved ones and remand them to federal prison absent any alleged violation or process.
Explore case
California
Jan 2025
Criminal Law Reform
Wilford v. Engleman (Amicus)
This case challenges the federal government鈥檚 authority to remove people from their homes, jobs, and loved ones and remand them to federal prison absent any alleged violation or process.
Maryland Supreme Court
Dec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
Roland Branch v. State of Maryland
This petition to the Supreme Court of Maryland asked the court to reconsider its adherence to Whren v. U.S., 517 U.S. 806 (1996), which declared that a traffic stop undertaken for pretextual reasons does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution so long as the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation occurred. The 吃瓜直播, alongside the 吃瓜直播 of Maryland, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant鈥檚 petition, in which the 吃瓜直播 argued that the court should take up the question of whether pretextual stops violate the Maryland Constitution. In September 2024, the Court denied the petition.
Explore case
Maryland Supreme Court
Dec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
Roland Branch v. State of Maryland
This petition to the Supreme Court of Maryland asked the court to reconsider its adherence to Whren v. U.S., 517 U.S. 806 (1996), which declared that a traffic stop undertaken for pretextual reasons does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution so long as the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation occurred. The 吃瓜直播, alongside the 吃瓜直播 of Maryland, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant鈥檚 petition, in which the 吃瓜直播 argued that the court should take up the question of whether pretextual stops violate the Maryland Constitution. In September 2024, the Court denied the petition.
North Carolina Supreme Court
Dec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
State v. Wright
This case in the North Carolina Supreme Court involves the question of whether the police violated the U.S. Constitution when they searched the defendant, Mr. Wright鈥檚, backpack even after he repeatedly said no to the search requests. The 吃瓜直播 alongside the 吃瓜直播 of North Carolina filed an amicus brief arguing that the search was unconstitutional because Mr. Wright鈥檚 eventual 鈥渃onsent鈥� was the result of police coercion. Our brief urges the court to consider the totality of the circumstances that make one more susceptible to coercion, including race and poverty.
Explore case
North Carolina Supreme Court
Dec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
State v. Wright
This case in the North Carolina Supreme Court involves the question of whether the police violated the U.S. Constitution when they searched the defendant, Mr. Wright鈥檚, backpack even after he repeatedly said no to the search requests. The 吃瓜直播 alongside the 吃瓜直播 of North Carolina filed an amicus brief arguing that the search was unconstitutional because Mr. Wright鈥檚 eventual 鈥渃onsent鈥� was the result of police coercion. Our brief urges the court to consider the totality of the circumstances that make one more susceptible to coercion, including race and poverty.