News

Criminal Defense Attorney Establishes Practice to Further Trial Experience, Fulfill Essential Function of the Law  

“The stakes are never higher than when someone’s liberty hangs in the balance,” says John J. Dowling III L’20 of why he chose to become a criminal defense attorney.

John Dowling smiles at the camera in a headshot in front of a blue sky

Dowling started his criminal defense practice, Dowling Defense Group LLC, in 2021 in Charlotte, North Carolina. After graduating from Syracuse University College of Law, he had opportunities to join larger organizations that would have initially been more lucrative, but he decided to blaze his own trail to gain trial experience as quickly as possible.

“It’s difficult to generate trial experience right out of law school. If you work for a big firm, it’s going to be a long time before you get to try a case in front of a jury,” he explains. “So I went another way and opened a law firm by myself, and it’s amazing. I’m so glad I did it, as I’ve already tried a number of cases and argued two cases in the U.S. Court of Appeals.”

Dowling believes that the advent of the plea bargain—which didn’t always exist—has resulted in less trial experience for attorneys. “Trial by jury pre-dates the American Revolution, and I don’t think plea deals are how the framers of the Constitution thought this is how it would go,” he says. “A jury trial is the spinal column of the criminal justice system, but it’s used less and less because the risks of going before a jury can be higher.”

His focus on federal criminal law is not often a common choice, but he likes the challenge of going up against the federal government, including the FBI, Secret Service, or IRS.

“It’s a huge process when the federal government comes at you with all its forces,” he says. “But, Syracuse Law set me up to be an effective criminal lawyer, and now I’m using those skills to help others.”

Dowling is thankful for the education he received at Syracuse Law, calling it “one of the best in the country” and noting the experience he gained in various legal externships, as well as Trial Practice, Trial Advocacy and Moot Court. He points to Associate Dean for Online Education and Teaching Professor Shannon Gardner as someone who had a big impact on him as she demonstrated excellence and professionalism within the law.

His law school education also cemented his beliefs that criminal defense attorneys are an essential function of the law. “Everyone deserves a defense,” Dowling says. “Whether someone is guilty or innocent, things need to be handled the right way, and rules need to be abided by in order for a fair system to exist.”

Many of his cases are considered white collar crimes, which come with complex questions and interpretations of the law. “Clients can get themselves into situations that weren’t nefarious, but the consequences can be devastating to their lives, marriages, finances, etc. And, whether or not the government can show proof beyond a reasonable doubt is not as cut and dried as people think,” Dowling says.

“White collar crimes can often be harder to figure out and more nuanced than violent crimes, but they still have devastating penalties,” he adds. “There are many people who are falsely accused or overcharged, not because prosecutors are corrupt but because a witness might be lying, evidence is presented in a certain way, or the government has taken shortcuts. Often, it’s the consequences of misunderstandings that put people in prison.”

He is pleased with the path he chose and finds his job as a defense attorney fascinating, interviewing witnesses, doing research, and demonstrating his knowledge of the law in front of juries, all in an effort to make sure his clients get a fair trial.

Dowling acknowledges there are a few cases he won’t take, but, he says, “I don’t struggle with what clients are accused of doing because I recognize that all people have rights. I’m not here to agree or disagree. I’m here to serve an essential function of the American legal system.”

Professor Emeritus William C. Banks on U.S. Acquiring Greenland “Clashes with Denmark and the EU Would be Legion”

Professor of Law Emeritus William C. Banks spoke with Newsweek for the story “Greenland as 51st state: What U.S. taking over Arctic island could look like”.

Banks, who specializes in national security law, called the idea of Greenland becoming a U.S. state “almost surely a pipe dream of Trump.” “Greenland would have to request statehood, itself a ridiculously remote prospect. Clashes with Denmark and the EU would be legion, and if the U.S. attempted to take Greenland by force, it would be waging an unlawful war.”

“Hypothetically,” for Greenland to become a state, Banks says, “Congress would have to enact a statute admitting Greenland (to the U.S.) and the president would then sign the bill, making it a law and adding Greenland. If the people and government of Greenland/Denmark remain opposed, it is hard to see how governance as a state could work.”

“Incredibly Sloppy and Dangerous,” says Professor Gregory Germain on War Plans Leaked on Signal Group Chat

Professor of Law Gregory Germain spoke with Newsweek about the use of the chat app Signal by Trump administration leaders to discuss war plans attacking Yemen. A journalist was added to the group chat.

“I don’t know if it’s technically a crime to use a server that is not set up and approved by the government to discuss top secret war plans; I do know that it’s incredibly sloppy and dangerous, and government officials need to be a lot more careful and put procedures in place to prevent something like this from happening again,” he said.

“But even if it is some sort of crime, who is going to prosecute? It’s very hard to see Pam Bondi’s Justice Department bringing charges over this incredibly sloppy and embarrassing incident,” he said.

Germain added that, under federal code, 18 USC 798, it is a crime to “knowingly and willfully” share classified information with people who do not have appropriate clearances.

“Presumably, the sharing of information with the journalist was a mistake, not a knowing and willful violation,” he said.

Vice Dean Keith Bybee Speaks with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation Radio on His Book “How Civility Works”

Vice Dean Keith Bybee appeared on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC Radio) program Future Tense, speaking about his book “How Civility Works.”  The program examines how society functions in an increasingly uncivil world.

Bybee says “When we think about law as something that is authoritatively determined according to a specified process, so we know something is a law for people in the community to obey not because I just said it or you just said it but because duly elected officials have followed the process for passing that law and has been promulgated and enforced according to preestablished rules, we have institutions in place called courts of law that tell us what to do when there is a dispute over what a law means.

We lack all that, typically, in the case of civility. That lack of governing and regulating institutions in the case of good manners has led people on occasion to make civility more like law and determine codes of conduct that can be enforced by authoritative institutions.”

Vice Dean’s segment starts at 2:34.

Professor Shubha Ghosh Comments on the Potential Oracle/TikTok Deal’s Impact on Oracle Shareholders

Crandall Melvin Professor of Law Shubha Ghosh spoke with Politico on the potential Oracle/TikTok deal in the story “Trump’s TikTok-Oracle deal could break the law — but nobody can stop him”.

Oracle shareholders may have standing to sue if the deal negatively affects the value of Oracle stock. However, even concerned shareholders may be unable to stop a deal between Oracle and TikTok from moving forward. Ghosh said shareholder lawsuits typically take place “after the fact,” triggering only once a deal is agreed to and later goes sideways.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to Hold In-Person Oral Arguments on March 28 at Syracuse University College of Law

(Syracuse, NY – March 24, 2025) The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will hold oral arguments at Syracuse University College of Law on March 28 from 10 to 11:30 a.m. The oral arguments are free and open to the public. Seating is limited.

The court session will be held in the Melanie Gray Ceremonial Courtroom in Dineen Hall, 950 Irving Avenue, Syracuse, NY 13244.

The cases to be argued are Keri Spring, et al v. Allegany-Limestone, et al and United States of America v. Allen R. Clark.

In addition, Director of Legal Communication & Research and Teaching Professor Aliza Milner will hold a lecture on the appellate process on March 28 at 9:30 a.m. in Dineen Hall. The lecture is open to all.

No cell phones, laptops, cameras, or video recording devices will be permitted in the courtroom during arguments. The College of Law will not be able to store any items.

About the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is one of the thirteen United States Courts of Appeals. Its territory covers the states of Connecticut, New York, and Vermont, and it has appellate jurisdiction over the U.S. district courts in the following federal judicial districts: District of Connecticut. Eastern District of New York. Northern District of New York. Southern District of New York, Western District of New York, and District of Vermont.

The U.S. Court of Appeals sits just below the Supreme Court of the United States in the judicial branch of the federal government.

College of Law’s JDinteractive Program Recognized by The Princeton Review as One of the 2025 Best Online J.D. Programs

The Princeton Review (TPR) has recognized Syracuse University College of Law’s JDinteractive (JDi) online J.D. program as one of the best Online J.D. Programs in their 2025 rankings. JDi is an established program with six years of experience in delivering online legal education designed for working professionals.

The program has more than 200 alumni and approximately 300 students currently enrolled. Alumni include doctors, compliance officers, national security leaders, and public advocates, among others.

Students in JDi can add an online MBA to their online J.D. through Syracuse University’s highly ranked Whitman School of Management. This first-of-its-kind program provides the educational basis for leaders to tackle today’s growing intersection of law and business and address complex transactions, rapid regulatory changes, and important compliance issues.

Also, Syracuse Law offers the only online Certificate of Advanced Study in National Security and Counterterrorism Law. Administered through the Syracuse University Institute for Security Policy and Law , this innovative program offers an interdisciplinary approach to critical issues in national security, counterterrorism, and related fields.

JDi features short in-person courses (“residencies”) 4-5 days in length throughout the program to provide unparalleled professional opportunities in places around the country and the world. The residencies feature College of Law alumni and noted leaders in various legal fields that provide real-world insights into today’s pressing legal topics.

Professor Nina Kohn, an internationally recognized scholar in Elder Law, leads an Elder Law residency held in Washington, D.C.

“Syracuse Law’s JDinteractive program is the ideal place for busy working professionals to earn a J.D. that fits their schedules,” says Associate Dean of Online Education Shannon Gardner. “We are seeing our graduates use their law degree to advance their careers, tackle new challenges, and be leaders in their communities.”

Professor Shubha Ghosh Provides an Assessment of the Stephen Thaler v. Shira Perlmutter AI Copyright Case

Crandall Melvin Professor of Law Shubha Ghosh spoke with Bloomberg Law for the article “Denial of Copyright to AI ‘Author’ Affirmed by D.C. Circuit” which assesses the impact of the decision in Stephen Thaler v. Shira Perlmutter on Artificial Intelligence and copyright.

Ghosh. Director of the Syracuse Intellectual Property Law Institute, acknowledged unintended features can become a part of a work, noting copyright doesn’t have an intent requirement. But he also said there’s a different degree of human involvement with more traditional tools, and that the AI itself provides much more creativity and originality than the human author by comparison.

It’s challenging to sort out the degree to which a user prompt contributes to an AI output, he said.

“How do you determine it, and who determines it?” he asked.

Professor Nina Kohn’s Article “Ageless Law” Has Been Accepted for Publication by North Carolina Law Review

David M. Levy L’48 Professor of Law Nina Kohn’s article “Ageless Law” was recently accepted for publication by North Carolina Law Review. It is forthcoming in 2026.

From the abstract: As states respond to the overturning of Roe v. Wade and concerns about retrenchment of federal civil rights protections, they are considering expanding state constitutional protections against discrimination—including age discrimination.  Indeed, in November 2022 and 2024 respectively, Nevada and New York voters overwhelmingly voted to amend their state constitutions to add age as a protected class.  It is in this political environment that this article asks a simple question that is, remarkably, largely unexplored in the legal literature: should law be “ageless”?

Professor Gregory Germain Sees Room for SCOTUS to Rule in President Trump’s Favor in Birthright Citizenship Challenge

Professor Gregory Germain spoke with Newsweek for an assessment of President Trump’s court cases that challenge the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of citizenship to anyone born in the United States.

Germain said that Trump’s lawyers will have to focus on the second phrase of the citizenship clause, arguing that children born in the US to illegal aliens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States.

“That seems like a question that will ultimately have to be decided by the Supreme Court. Trump can argue that the phrase about being ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ must have meaning and should be read as a limitation on birthright citizenship,” Germain told Newsweek.

“The Supreme Court will have to decide whether children of illegal or temporary residents qualify, and whether an interpretation by executive order rather than statute is effective.”