PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3870)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 2, 2002
Capital Defense Counsel Standards Act of 2002 - Entitles a defendant in a State capital case who is financially unable to obtain adequate representation or investigative, expert, or other necessary services before or after judgment or in a post-conviction proceeding to appointment of one or more attorneys and provision of such services.Sets forth minimum experience requirements for prejudgment and post-judgment appointed attorneys, including five years of practice in the court in which the prosecution is to be tried or in the appellate court, three years of experience in the actual trial of felony prosecutions or in the handling of felony appeals, and being learned in the law applicable to capital cases.Requires each appointed attorney, unless replaced by similarly qualified counsel, to represent the defendant throughout every stage of available judicial proceedings.Sets forth provisions regarding ex parte communications and attorney fees and costs.Declares that failure in a Federal court proceeding to comply with this Act's procedures creates an irrebuttable presumption that the performance of petitioner's counsel was deficient. Denies a petitioner relief unless he or she shows that the result of the proceeding would have been different if such performance had not been deficient.
People & committees
Sen. Specter, Arlen [R-PA] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3870)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3859-3865)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.2442 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.2442 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.2442 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.2442 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.