In the News

Professor Nina Kohn on ProPublica’s Article on the Public Guardianship System: “There’s a profound lack of monitoring by the courts.”

Professor Nina Kohn provided perspective to MarketWatch on the public guardianship system covered in the recent ProPublica news story “Bedbugs, Rats and No Heat: How One Woman Endured a Decade of Neglect in New York’s Guardianship System”.

Speaking to MarketWatch about the story, Kohn said “We really have no idea how common [cases of abuse] are, because there is a woeful lack of data about what is going on. We have known for decades that vulnerable people are placed in guardianships and then courts fail to engage in any meaningful monitoring of those arrangements to make sure that they are actually protected.”

Kohn continues that the blame is “a profound lack of monitoring for much of the problem. And that’s on the courts.”

Kohn served as the Uniform Law Commission Reporter for the Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship, and Other Protective Arrangements Act.

Professor Nina Kohn on the Wendy Williams Guardianship Case: “There is a profound lack of data on guardianship.”

Professor Nina Kohn spoke with Marketplace at length on the news of talk show host Wendy Williams being placed in guardianship. In the article “Wendy Williams’ guardianship case highlights the Need for Reforms”, Kohn speaks about:

  • the guardianship petition process
  • who can be appointed guardians (including professional guardians)
  • guardianship abuses (such as the Michael Oher case), and
  • ways to avoid guardianship problems, such as the recently released Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship and Other Protective Arrangements Act, a statute drafted by a nonprofit that advocates for consistent laws across the country. Kohn was the reporter for the Act.

“This isn’t just a story about bad apples doing bad things when they’re appointed guardians. This is really a story about courts removing people’s rights without adequate justification, and then not monitoring the relationship to make sure that it’s actually protected for people,” she said. It’s difficult if not impossible to quantify how often this happens, because Kohn said “there is a profound lack of data on the guardianship.” 

Professor Roy Gutterman L’00 Discusses the Julian Assange Case with the Voice of America

Professor Roy Gutterman L’00, Director of the Tully Center for Free Speech, discussed aspects of the U.S. government’s case against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange with the Voice of America (VOA.)

In the video clip, Gutterman notes that “Certain elements of what Wikileaks and Julian Assange have done really do fit the mold of journalistic function but just dumping material out there without any context, analysis or any real vetting might not rise to the level we’d expect from someone we’d call a journalist.”

Gutterman’s comments are at :23 and 2:39 of the video.

The Hon. James E. Baker Discusses AI Ethics, Navalny death, and More on the ABA National Security Law Podcast

The Hon. James E. Baker, Professor and Director of the Syracuse Institute for Security Policy and Law, recently discussed AI ethics, the death of Alexei Navalny in Russia, and other current national security topics on the ABA National Security Law Podcast.

The AI discussion touched on recommended protocols for applying AI within the practice of law, and the risks AI technology could pose on election cycles across the globe, among other aspects of Artificial Intelligence, law, and national security.

Professor Gregory Germain Discusses Possible Outcomes in the New York State Civil Fraud Judgement Against Former President Trump

Professor Gregory Germain discussed with Market Watch what avenues New York State could take against former President Trump if he can’t pay the $454 Million judgement in his New York State civil fraud trial.

Germain notes that the state “could levy and sell his assets, lien his real property, and garnish anyone who owes him money” to recoup the $454 Million judgement if his appeal is rejected and he cannot pay. Filing for bankruptcy is an option to protect his assets if he cannot post the bond or meet the appellate division’s bonding requirements.

Professor Germain is also quoted in the Newser article “Engoron Refuses to Delay $364M Trump Judgment”.

Professor Gregory Germain Speaks with the Media on the Trump Fraud Ruling

Professor Gregory Germain has spoken with several media outlets on the recent ruling against Donald Trump in the New York fraud suit. He has provided insight into the appeals process, legal strategies, and the likelihood that the ruling would be reversed.

Trump will dispute NYC judge’s definition of ‘fraud’ in appeal of $355 million fine: report New York Post, February 19, 2024

Donald Trump Can Reverse Judge Engoron’s Ruling—Here’s How Newsweek, February 19, 2024

With business empire on brink of abyss, tycoon Trump recasts himself as victim The Guardian, February 17, 2024

Trump Spared From ‘Corporate Death Penalty,’ But His Business Will Still Get Slammed The Associated Press, February 17, 2024

Donald Trump dodges ‘corporate death penalty’ in New York fraud case but business hit hard The Mirror, February 17, 2024

Donald Trump Faces a Day of Reckoning Newsweek, February 16, 2024

Trump’s Civil Fraud Ruling May Be About “No Victims” Defense (Dutch translation needed), February 16,  2024

Professor Gregory Germain spoke with Distinguished Visiting Lecturer David Cay Johnston for an article on bankruptcy options for former President Trump.

Professor Gregory Germain spoke with Distinguished Visiting Lecturer David Cay Johnston for an article on bankruptcy options for former President Trump.

In the DC Report article “Trump’s Legal Delay Tactics Will Lead To Further Self-Destruction”, Germain says what Trump can achieve in bankruptcy is delays, but almost certainly not escaping paying, assuming he has the assets to fulfill the judgments against him.

Germain notes that Trump could put his company, the Trump Organization, into bankruptcy, but that would not help him because he is personally liable as the sole owner for the judgments in all three cases.

Professor Shubha Ghosh Discusses Legal Issues Around Removing Explicit Images Online

Crandall Melvin Professor of Law Shubha Ghosh, Director of the Syracuse Intellectual Property Law Institute, recently spoke with Spectrum News on the legalities of having explicit images, both juvenile and adult, removed from online platforms.

Ghosh doesn’t believe current laws go far enough in providing recourse for victims. “I think the law should give people private cause of action to go after revenge porn. The law should also put some requirements or restrictions on social media providers to try to prevent this from happening…just to rely on industry regulation alone probably would not do enough,” says Ghosh.

Professor Ghosh also spoke with WGN Radio on the same topic, starting at the 37 minute mark.

Professor Paula Johnson on Unresolved Civil Rights-era Killings: “There wasn’t a Commitment to Solving the Cases.”

Professor Paula Johnson, Director of the Cold Case Justice Initiative, spoke with Bloomberg Law News for the article “Civil Rights Era Killings Draw New Scrutiny, Scant Prosecutions.” Johnson, who studies racially motivated killings of the Civil Rights era, summarizes that the lack of justice for victims and their families is that “there wasn’t a commitment to solving the cases.”

“That’s why we’re still talking about racially motivated killings of the civil rights era because they didn’t get the full treatment they should have gotten,” she said. “As each year and each decade goes by, that becomes more and more difficult.”

This article may be behind a paywall.