The material in this article is general legal information for educational use only. It should not be treated as legal, financial, or tax advice, and reading it does not form an attorney-client relationship. Legal rules vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Questions about a specific matter belong with a qualified professional. The author and publisher disclaim liability for actions taken in reliance on this content.
Key Facts
- Federal level: In June 2013, the American Bar Association called on Congress to undertake a comprehensive review of the federal criminal law.
- Federal level: The ABA estimated that more than 4,500 separate federal criminal statutes were scattered throughout the U.S. Code without any coherent organization.
- Federal level: The bipartisan House Overcriminalization Task Force was created in May 2013 and held ten congressional hearings over its one-year lifespan.
- Federal level: Between 2008 and 2013, at least 439 new federal criminal offenses were enacted, averaging nearly 69 new crimes per year.
- Federal level: Democratic members of the Task Force released a December 2014 report that recommended reforms, including the repeal of all mandatory minimum sentences.
- State level: Since 2000, at least 29 states have modified or repealed mandatory sentencing policies, contrasting with federal inaction on similar reforms.
- National overview: The ABA’s 1998 Task Force on the Federalization of Criminal Law had earlier documented the expansion of federal criminal law into areas traditionally handled by the states.
- Federal level: As of May 2026, no comprehensive overhaul of the federal criminal code has been enacted, and the Count the Crimes to Cut Act, introduced in the Senate, remains pending.
Last reviewed: May 2026. Legal rules, forms, deadlines, and procedures can change by jurisdiction, agency, and court system.
- The ABA’s 2013 call for a federal criminal code review
- The staggering scale of the federal criminal code
- The House Overcriminalization Task Force
- Task force extension and ABA advocacy
- The Democratic members’ report and its recommendations
- The lack of a bipartisan consensus and ongoing reform efforts
- State level changes highlight the federal gap
- A call that still echoes
- Sources
Legislative proposals related to federal criminal law reform, including the Count the Crimes to Cut Act and potential amendments to mandatory minimum sentencing, are subject to ongoing congressional action.
The ABA’s 2013 call for a federal criminal code review
In June 2013, the American Bar Association stepped into a growing debate about the size and clarity of the federal criminal law. According to an ABA Washington Letter published that month, the association placed itself “in the forefront of congressional efforts to evaluate federal criminal laws” when its witness, William N. Shepherd, chair of the ABA Criminal Justice Section, appeared before the newly formed House Judiciary Committee’s Task Force on Over‑criminalization on June 14, 2013.
Shepherd told the task force that serious problems at every stage of the criminal justice process “undermine basic tenets of fairness and equality as well as the public’s expectation of safety.” He described an “overburdened, expensive, and often ineffective criminal justice system” and emphasized that both overcriminalization and over‑federalization dilute the impact of important existing legislation by flooding the legal landscape with redundant and overlapping provisions.
The staggering scale of the federal criminal code
One of the most striking figures presented by the ABA was an estimate that more than 4,500 separate federal criminal statutes were scattered throughout the U.S. Code without any coherent organization. This number continues to grow. By December 2014, the Democratic members of the Overcriminalization Task Force noted that the federal criminal code had ballooned to approximately 5,000 crimes—roughly double the count in 1970 and one‑third higher than in 1980.
The challenge of counting federal crimes exactly remains. The Congressional Research Service identified at least 439 new federal criminal offenses enacted between 2008 and 2013 alone, averaging about 68.5 new crimes per year. Many more are hidden in regulatory provisions. The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) has pointed out that an estimated 10,000 or more federal regulations can be enforced criminally, compounding the problem.
The House Overcriminalization Task Force
While the ABA’s call for a comprehensive review was pivotal, it came at a time when Congress had already begun to act. In May 2013, the House Judiciary Committee unanimously created the “Overcriminalization Task Force of 2013,” chaired by Crime Subcommittee Chair Jim Sensenbrenner (R‑WI) with Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D‑VA). The task force’s bipartisan leadership oversaw ten congressional hearings over roughly one year, addressing topics such as the scope of overcriminalization, the erosion of mens rea requirements, the expansion of regulatory crimes, and mandatory minimum sentencing.
The inaugural hearing on June 14, 2013, featured Shepherd alongside other witnesses. The task force’s work was aided by the Congressional Research Service, which Chairman Sensenbrenner said was being enlisted to launch “a thorough review of the U.S. criminal code.”
Task force extension and ABA advocacy
In February 2014, the House Judiciary Committee extended the task force for an additional six months, authorizing it through August 4, 2014. The extension received a boost from the ABA, which had urged the committee in December 2013 to give the task force more time to “continue to provide a forum for a constructive conversation on the problems of over‑criminalization.”
Chairman Sensenbrenner described the federal criminal code as “muddled and outdated” and stated that his goal was to “codify and modernize the criminal code.” Despite the extension and continued advocacy, the task force did not produce a bipartisan consensus report.
The Democratic members’ report and its recommendations
The only formal report to emerge from the task force’s work came from its Democratic members. Released in December 2014 by Ranking Member Bobby Scott, the comprehensive document laid out a series of reform proposals. Among them were the repeal of all mandatory minimum sentences, reforms to the mens rea requirement in federal statutes, and a call for Congress to halt the piecemeal addition of new criminal offenses without a coherent framework.
The report also noted that between 2000 and 2007, 452 new federal criminal offenses had been enacted, on top of the 439 added between 2008 and 2013. The Democratic members highlighted the 1998 ABA Task Force on the Federalization of Criminal Law, which had identified four criteria for evaluating whether an offense should be federalized: offenses against the federal government itself, criminal activity with substantial multi‑state or international aspects, complex commercial enterprises, and serious high‑level state or local government corruption.
The lack of a bipartisan consensus and ongoing reform efforts
The absence of a joint final report underscored the partisan divide on how to address overcriminalization. While the task force’s hearings concluded in 2014, the underlying problems persisted. Subsequent legislative attempts have met limited success. The Criminal Code Modernization and Simplification Act (H.R. 1860), a over‑1,000‑page bill introduced in 2013, attempted to revamp the criminal code but never moved out of subcommittee.
More recently, the Count the Crimes to Cut Act has been introduced in both the 117th Congress (2021) and again in 2026 by a bipartisan group including Senators Mike Lee, Chris Coons, and Peter Welch. The bill would direct the Attorney General to compile a list of all federal criminal statutory offenses, including their elements, potential penalties, and prosecution data—essentially creating the first comprehensive catalog of federal crimes. As of May 2026, that legislation remains pending.
State level changes highlight the federal gap
While the federal government has struggled to reform its criminal code, many states have acted. According to the Democratic task force report, at least 29 states since 2000 have modified or repealed mandatory sentencing policies. States have also taken independent steps to curb overcriminalization within their own systems, often through bipartisan legislation.
The contrast between state action and federal inaction has been frequently noted by advocates who see the ABA’s 2013 call as still relevant. The Sentencing Project, in its 2025 research brief on over‑federalization, observed that “a broad and growing number of crimes are criminalized at both the state and federal levels,” allowing either or both jurisdictions to prosecute. This dual-sovereignty reality intensifies the need for clarity at the federal level.
A call that still echoes
The ABA’s June 2013 push for a comprehensive congressional review of federal criminal law did not lead to a sweeping rewrite, but it helped energize a sustained conversation. The work of the Overcriminalization Task Force, the Democratic members’ report, and the introduction of bills like the Count the Crimes to Cut Act are all part of a slow, ongoing effort to bring coherence to a code that many experts, including the ABA and NACDL, have labeled a “disgrace.”
The problem remains both large and complex. With an unknown total number of federal crimes scattered across many titles of the U.S. Code and an enormous web of regulatory offenses, the goal of fair notice—a cornerstone of the rule of law—is often elusive. As Congress continues to consider legislation that would simply count the crimes, the ABA’s 2013 request for a full review stands as a marker of how much work remains to be done.
The ABA’s role in federal criminal justice advocacy extends beyond this single event. For example, the association has previously criticized the Department of Justice for coercing waiver of attorney‑client privilege, and its presidents have called for Americans to act on their beliefs regarding the jury system.
