Publications & Resources

Search TCP documents by typing a keyword (e.g., author, document title, etc.) into the search box and hitting the search button. Refine your results by selecting from the issues, material types, date range, and committee options listed. You can also browse recent publications and resources below.

Search by Keyword


Browse by Issue(s)

  Checks & Balances
  Constitutional Amendments
  Judicial Independence
  Separation of Powers
  War Powers

  Counter-Terrorism Policies & Practices
  Detention & Prosecution of Terrorist Suspects
  Material Support of Terrorist Organizations

  Criminal Discovery Reform
  Data Collection & Privacy
  Data Mining
  Fusion Centers

  Death Penalty
  DNA Collection
  Government Surveillance & Searches
  Border Searches of Electronic Devices
  Cybersecurity
  Domestic Spying & FISA
  Location Tracking & ECPA
  Patriot Act
  Video Surveillance
  Watch Lists

  Immigration Reform
  Policing Reform
  Militarization of Police
  Body-worn Cameras

  Right to Counsel
  Sentencing Reform
  Transparency & Accountability
  Classification & Secrecy
  Controlled Unclassified Information
  Open Government
 Privacy & Civil Liberties Oversight Board
  State Secrets Privilege

Browse by Material Type(s)
Browse by Date Range
Browse by Committee(s)
*Note: Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in Clearinghouse material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Constitution Project.

Search Results

Amicus Brief in Smith v. Texas (U.S. Supreme Court, Cert. Stage)
Former United States Court of Appeals Judges arguing that the Supreme Court should hear the case because it concerns the obligation of state courts to comply with decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court and for states not to invent new procedural grounds to avoid compliance in a case where written jury instructions did not permit jurors to consider mitigating evidence when determining whether to sentence LaRoyce Smith to death.
Amicus Brief in Smith v. Texas (U.S. Supreme Court, Cert. Stage)
Arguing that the instructions to the sentencing jury in the capital prosecution of LaRoyce Smith violated the 8th Amendment because the written instruction did not allow the jury to consider the mitigating evidence that had been introduced in violation of clearly established Supreme Court precedent.
Amicus Brief in Smith v. Texas (U.S. Supreme Court, Cert. Stage)
Arguing that the instructions to the sentencing jury in the capital prosecution of LaRoyce Smith violated the 8th Amendment because the written instruction did not allow the jury to consider the mitigating evidence that had been introduced in violation of clearly established Supreme Court precedent.
Testimony of Antoinette Bosco to Senate Committee Regarding an “Examination of the Death Penalty in the United States”
Urging the abolition of the death penalty and stating society has the right and the responsibility to punish, and that murderers should be given life, confined away from society, without parole.
Testimony of Jeffrey Fagan to Senate Committee Regarding “Deterrence and the Death Penalty: Risk, Uncertainty, and Public Policy Choices”
Discussing significant flaws that undermine claims about the deterent effect of capital punishment and explaining the risks of error and the high cost of capital punishment.
Testimony of Vicki Schieber to Senate Committee Regarding Victims’ Families and the Death Penalty
Discussing her opposition to the death penalty and explaining the problems with linking closure for victims’ families with the execution of the offender.
Coleman’s DNA Test a “Quality Check” on the System: DNA Test Proves Virginia’s Roger Coleman Guilty
Coalition letter to Senate Conferees regarding opposition to the Death Penalty Provisions in House Patriot, USA Patriot and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005
Urging Conferees to report the Patriot Act Reauthorization legislation without the death penalty provisions because the provisions raise serious constitutional concerns especially 8th amendment concerns and would result in a drastic change in federal death penalty law.
Amicus Brief in Spirko v. Bradshaw (U.S. Supreme Court, Merits Stage)
Former Prosecutors and Judges arguing that misleading disclosures cannot satisfy a prosecutor's obligation to disclose favorable information and asserting that due process prohibits prosecutors from presenting a theory of the case for which evidence they possess and do not disclose contradicts or undermines that theory.
Amicus Brief in Spirko v. Bradshaw (U.S. Supreme Court, Merits Stage)
Former Prosecutors and Judges arguing that misleading disclosures cannot satisfy a prosecutor's obligation to disclose favorable information and asserting that due process prohibits prosecutors from presenting a theory of the case for which evidence they possess and do not disclose contradicts or undermines that theory.
Donate Now

US Constitution

Upcoming Events