News

The Center for Public Integrity Interviews Professor Nina Kohn on Guardianship Reform

Professor Nina Kohn, a white woman with brown shoulder-length hair, wearing a black blazer over a tan sweater, with gold necklaces and earrings, smiles in front of a window. She is holding a dark blue book.

A number of high-profile cases lately, from Britney Spears to Wendy Williams, have led to growing calls for reform of financial guardianship and conservatorship systems. According to a National Council on Disability Report, there were an estimated 1.3 million active guardianship or conservatorship cases nationwide as of 2018. People with intellectual and developmental disabilities, the elderly and those who have experienced traumatic brain injuries are among those who are most likely to have guardians appointed. 

The Center for Public Integrity interviewed Professor Nina Kohn about her take on abuse in conservatorships, reform efforts, and how people can protect themselves. 

According to Kohn, “Historically, guardianship has been treated almost like a rite of passage for young adults with intellectual disabilities, who were assumed to be incapable of making decisions for themselves. Increasingly, today there is recognition that that’s not proper and that even individuals with substantial cognitive and intellectual disabilities can make decisions for themselves, especially with support.

Another category of people you often see this with are people with dementia who have progressive cognitive decline that’s making it harder and harder for them to manage their own affairs. And then a third primary category is individuals who are experiencing some level of mental illness or non-progressive cognitive challenge acquired later in life, and that could be through a traumatic brain injury.”

Kohn explains that the United States has seen efforts in place to try to improve guardianship since the early 1980s. Through her work, she focuses on trying to realign incentives so that it’s easier to do the right thing and harder to do the wrong thing.

“If these issues concern you, I really encourage people to reach out to their state legislature,” Kohn said. “I think we’ve seen enough problems to know that we need to fix the systems, and we need to change the incentives so that individuals aren’t stripped of their basic liberties unnecessarily. To the extent that seeing some of these horror stories can be a call to action, maybe there’s a silver lining.”

Professor David Driesen Discusses Supreme Court Ruling on Climate Action in The Hill

Professor David Driesen

Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling on climate action last week, Professor David Driesen discussed how the ruling on climate regulation could stunt the EPA’s ability to prevent climate change from worsening in The Hill.

The case, focusing on the scope of the EPA’s powers to enact climate regulations, was brought by several states and led by West Virginia, seeking to preemptively block the Biden administration from setting standards that are likely to result in a shift away from coal plants and towards those powered by cleaner energy sources.  

Driesen said he worried that the decision could lead the court to try to explicitly block the closure of power plants.  

“If they put in broad rhetoric about not closing power plants and not restructuring industry, that could make it not impossible but very hard to use EPA regulation to address global climate disruption effectively,” Driesen explained.  

Professor Shubha Ghosh Meets with Jeffrey Cross L’75 to Discuss Proposed Antitrust Reform Bill

Professor Shubha Ghosh

In a podcast run by the College of Law’s Intellectual Property Law Institute and the Innovation Law Center, Professor Shubha Ghosh, director of the Syracuse Intellectual Property Law Institute, meets with Jeffery Cross L’75 to discuss the proposed antitrust reform bill originating from Senator Klobuchar. 

Cross is a partner in the Chicago law firm of Freeborn & Peters, LLP, who wrote “Amending the Antitrust Laws to Address Big Tech”, a column forthcoming in the July issue of Today’s General Counsel.

Professor of Law Emeritus William Banks Featured in January 6th Hearings Lawyer 2 Lawyer Podcast

Professor William Banks, a white man white short white hair, wearing a brown suit jacket over a white collared shirt, smiles.

The January 6th hearings, a series of five scheduled hearings investigating the January 6th insurrection at the U.S. Capitol by the United States House Select Committee, is currently underway. In a Lawyer 2 Lawyer podcast on the Legal Talk Network, Professor of Law Emeritus William C. Banks discusses the hearings with host Craig Williams. 

Williams and Banks consider the purpose of the hearings, the goals of the January 6th Select Committee, the potential criminal referrals to the DOJ by the committee, and whether there could be possible criminal prosecution due to the information revealed in these hearings.

During their discussion, Williams draws a parallel to the January 6th insurrection and the Watergate scandal. 

“One of the starkest contracts between Watergate and January 6th is that the principal players in Watergate agreed to abide by the rule of law once their activities were exposed, and indeed it was the rule of law that caused many of them…to come clean,” Banks said. “And indeed for the president to concede once the Supreme Court had ruled that he had to turn over tape recordings of the cover-up, that he himself was culpable and needed to resign the presidency.  So, a more humble president than Donald Trump to be sure, even though President Nixon clearly violated the law.  He did so and then when he was caught red-handed so to speak, he said, ‘Okay, you got me.  I can’t sustain the presidency in the face of having participated in a cover-up of Watergate.’ But it pales in comparison to the activities that were undertaken surrounding the 2020 election.” 

Banks states that the main takeaway from the hearings is their contribution to history. 

The vast compilation of multimedia shown by the video includes what Banks refers to as “incredible video footage, some of it deeply disturbing and all of it nearly illuminating that is going to be around to stand the test of time and to teach again our children, grandchildren and other generations about this threat to democracy. So I think that’s the value. That’s the takeaway from the hearings and whatever else happens there, a worthwhile endeavor for that reason.”

In Honor of Juneteenth, Professor Paula Johnson Participates in Two Symposia on Matters of Race and Law

Professor Paula Johnson (Center of Photo) at the Franklin H. Williams Commission’s Race and Law Symposium

Earlier this month, Professor Paula Johnson participated in two symposia on matters of race and law in honor of Juneteenth. The first event was the Franklin H. Williams Commission’s Race and Law Symposium. The full-day event took place on June 16th and centered on illuminating modern systemic racism’s roots in slavery and legally codified racial discrimination, including two panel discussions with leading legal academics, practitioners, and historians. 

Johnson moderated the panel, synthesizing multiple complex legal perspectives into an informative and thought-provoking session.  

Later that day, Johnson served as the keynote speaker for the Juneteenth commemoration for the Capital District Black and Hispanic Bar Association and the Montgomery County Bar Association.

In a talk entitled Claiming Freedom: Triumphs and Travails of Emancipation Lawsuits, Johnson examined the efforts of enslaved and formerly enslaved persons of African descent to secure their freedom and legal rights through the court system. Johnson focused her discussion on notable efforts such as Sojourner Truth’s successful New York State lawsuit in 1828, to free her son, Peter, who had been illegally sold in Alabama. This litigation made Truth the first Black woman to successfully sue a White man for a family member’s freedom.  

The discussion also focused on the triumphs and challenges of seeking freedom and other legal rights through the court system during Antebellum and Postbellum periods. Examination of these cases aims to compare the relationships between past and present demands for liberation and equality as a multifaceted and constant struggle, which can lead toward a free and informed future.

University Professor David Driesen Selected as a Fulbright U.S. Scholar to Research the Impact of Carbon Pricing

Professor David Driesen

University Professor David Driesen will study the impact of carbon pricing and produce scholarship on his findings as to the outcome of his Fulbright U.S. Scholar selection. Driesen will be conducting his research at the University of Ottawa, Canada beginning on September 6.  He joins Bond, Schoeneck & King Distinguished Professor Cora True-Frost G’01, L’01 as College of Law Fulbright scholars for 2022-2023.

“Professor Driesen is a leading scholar in environmental law and this support will further his thoughtful research in the area of carbon pricing and climate change,” says College of Law Dean Craig Boise. “Fulbright Scholarships are highly competitive and receiving one reflects the value and urgency of an applicant’s research. I look forward to David’s continued scholarship in this area and the impact it will have on our students.”

What is your research focus for this distinguished appointment and what are your intended outcomes?  

My research focus is on new literature suggesting that carbon pricing (emissions trading and carbon taxes) has not worked very well. I want to evaluate this literature and put it into a kind of conceptual framework. Much of this literature builds on my previous scholarship in this area.

What are your intended outcomes from your research?  

I plan to publish a law review article and probably at least one short peer-reviewed piece reporting the results. I hope to improve the debate about the value of carbon pricing. 

Why did you pursue a Fulbright?

The University of Ottawa has a “Smart Prosperity Institute,” which is very good, and its leadership encouraged me to apply. Canada has required each of its provinces to adopt some sort of carbon pricing program, so it’s a good laboratory for looking at how well it’s working. 

What impact will this have on your teaching/scholarship? 

I expect that this will inform my teaching of climate law and in one way or another inform the future direction of my climate scholarship. I’ve been doing more constitutional law work in the last few years, and this is a way of bridging back to the climate disruption work. 

Three College of Law Students Awarded 2022 Pat Tillman Foundation Scholarships

2022 Tillman Scholars from the College of Law

The Pat Tillman Foundation has announced its scholars for 2022 which includes three Syracuse University College of Law students: Natasha DeLeon (USMC Veteran), Amanda Higginson (Navy veteran), and William Rielly (Army veteran.) They join a fourth Syracuse University Tillman scholar, Anthony Ornelaz, Master of Fine Arts, College of Arts and Science, Air Force Veteran.

“Tillman Scholarships are extremely competitive and are only awarded to those who have made an impact through their service. I am both pleased and grateful that not one, but three College of Law students have been awarded Tillman scholarships for this year. Natasha, Amanda, and William are living extraordinary lives through their military commitments and now they are on the path to becoming extraordinary Orange lawyers,”

College of Law Dean Craig Boise

The three students are enrolled in the College’s JDinteractive (JDi) program. Reilly is in his second year, Higginson is in her first year, and DeLeon will start the program in the Fall 2022 semester.

An ABA-Approved Online Law Degree Program, JDi is taught by Syracuse University College of Law faculty to the same high standards as Syracuse’s residential J.D. program. JDi is designed for students who desire a high-caliber legal education with substantial flexibility, such as those with military commitments. The program combines real-time, live online class sessions with self-paced instruction, on-campus courses, and experiential learning opportunities.

Read this story for more information on the Syracuse University 2022 Tillman scholars.

Natasha DeLeon, USMC Veteran

Natasha DeLeon joined the United States Marine Corps to pursue her goal of serving others on a grand scale. As a Marine, she worked to deploy service members to combat locations in support of various operations. In 2014, she deployed to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, where she aided in the return of over 120,000 service members to their families back home.

While serving in the Marine Corps, DeLeon began volunteering in San Diego’s foster care system as a Court-Appointed Special Advocate. This led her to pursue a Bachelor of Arts in Psychology and work part-time at a group home for teen foster boys. Upon completion of her service, her passion for social work grew. DeLeon earned a Master of Social Work in 2019, while she also interned as a therapist. During this time, she lived in Togo while supporting her husband during his active-duty Marine Corps career. While in West Africa, DeLeon led physical self-defense courses for women in vulnerable positions and volunteered with non-profit organizations centered around eliminating gender-based violence.

Following their tour in Togo, DeLeon and her family moved to Colombia where she began working remotely as a paralegal for a private law firm. This is where she began to connect the injustices in the legal and social work systems. From here, DeLeon developed a passion for criminal defense and family law. She is pursuing a Juris Doctor degree so she can provide legal assistance and advocacy as an attorney.

Amanda Higginson, Navy Veteran

Adopted as an infant, Amanda Higginson’s upbringing in South Florida was anything but typical. Her father, who was shot and paralyzed in the Vietnam War, taught her about extreme resilience and persistence in the face of adversity. Wanting to give back to military medicine, Higginson received a Navy Health Professions Scholarship and earned her medical degree at the Alpert Medical School at Brown University. She completed her residency in Pediatrics at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center Bethesda and served on active duty for seven years alongside her husband, deploying twice.

Currently the interim Associate Dean for Student Affairs at the Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University, Higginson supports students on their journey to achieve their personal, academic, and career goals. She continues to practice general outpatient pediatric medicine, caring for children in a largely rural, underserved area. Choosing to enter law school as a mid-career physician, Higginson saw law school as an opportunity to enhance her advocacy for children particularly related to social determinants of health, as well as expand her knowledge of issues that impact the daily functioning of an academic medical center in order to more effectively advocate for her students.  At the intersection of law and medicine, Higginson hopes to create structural change both at work and in her community to empower others to live, work, and achieve their goals at their full potential.

William Rielly, College of Law, Army Veteran

William Rielly is an Army veteran and West Point graduate. His career has ranged from leading artillery units in Germany to executive roles at Microsoft and Apple. While working at Apple, Rielly started volunteering in California state prisons and found the incarcerated men he worked with wanted to be accountable for their actions and create a positive future. He discovered immense untapped potential among the incarcerated men and was inspired to leave his job at Apple and focus full-time on reform efforts in the criminal legal and parole system. 

Rielly intends to change the parole and probation laws across the country to create pathways of redemption for incarcerated and formerly incarcerated people so they can leverage their talents, achieve their full potential, and positively impact their communities. He intends to lead this innovation and create a better system through legal advocacy, changing the public’s perception of the issues, and enlisting advocates inside and outside the current system. The outcomes he foresees are better, safer communities; more highly qualified employees; and a criminal legal system of accountability and redemption.

Professor Paula Johnson Speaks with NewsChannel 9 and CNY Central about the Implications of the Supreme Court’s Ruling to Overturn Roe v Wade

Professor Paula Johnson

Professor Paula Johnson spoke with two local news outlets, NewsChannel 9 and CNY Central, about the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.  

In her discussion with NewsChannel 9, Johnson explained that “what has struck me is just how sweeping the opinion is. When we got the draft opinion, we did not get all the concurring opinions and we certainly had not gotten the accenting opinion yet. But now we have all the opinions in their full scope. And I must say from my own perspective, it is quite sweeping and quite devastating.” 

The decision implicates not only reproductive rights, but it also implicates rights to other privacy issues that have to do with American citizens. Johnson believes that the ruling insinuates that women’s lives are subordinate to every other person in society, and even to those who are in embryotic stages. She also expresses that this ruling will have a most profound impact on the lives of women of color and poorer women who will no longer have access to safe and legal abortions for the sake of their own health.

When speaking to CNY Central about how this affects women in the State of New York in particular, Johnson confirms that people will legally be able to come to New York for an abortion if it’s illegal in their home state. Out-of-state patients made up about 9% of those who received abortions in New York in 2019, according to the CDC, which is up from 5% in 2015.

“The State of New York would also exercise its authority to not comply with requests, say extradition requests or that sort of thing, where they believe that someone has violated the law,” said Johnson.

Professor Peter Blanck, Chairman of the Burton Blatt Institute, Discusses the Fair Labor Standards Act on NPR’s Marketplace

Professor Peter Blanck

The Department of Labor is suing a Montana ranch that employs people with disabilities, alleging the ranch unlawfully paid them as little as $1.17 an hour, reports NPR’s Marketplace podcast. An exception to the Fair Labor Standards Act permits some certified employers to pay workers with disabilities less than the federal minimum wage.

According to Professor Peter Blanck, chairman of the Burton Blatt Institute, the 1938 law came at a time when lawmakers were starting to look at work opportunities for people with disabilities as veterans were returning from World War 1, and previously the Civil War.

“The below-minimum-wage program was kind of a product of its time that was not charity, but was a sense that people with disabilities could in some ways be employed,” Blanck said. In the last century, however, thinking and laws around disability have evolved.

Vice Dean Keith J. Bybee Comments in USA Today on the Lack of a Supreme Court Code of Ethics

Vice Dean Keith Bybee

In a recent survey of judges across the United States conducted by the National Judicial College and highlighted by USA Today, more than 97% responded “yes” to the question of whether the Supreme Court justices should be bound by a code of conduct. According to the U.S. Constitution, a justice does not have to be a lawyer or attend law school to become a Supreme Court justice, so they are not bound by the ethics required of attorneys.

Vice Dean Keith J. Bybee offered comments on the subject, arguing that there should be an ethical code for justices given the fact that in recent decades, all the conservatives on the court were nominated by Republicans and the more liberal members by Democrats.

“The split in judicial philosophy maps perfectly into a partisan split,” Bybee explained. “So as a result, it’s easier to read decisions on the court as a partisan one.”

January 6th committee hearings have brought a potential conflict of interest for Justice Clarence Thomas into light, as his wife Virginia “Ginni” Thomas sent text messages to former President Donald Trump’s chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and emails to Trump campaign attorney, John Eastman, as part of her alleged efforts to try to overturn the 2020 election. Justice Thomas then chose not to recuse himself from a case about whether Trump’s White House records should be turned over to the committee. 

“The first line of enforcement is self-enforcement,” said Bybee. “When you’re bound by a code of ethics, it leads you to ask questions about your own activities, and to achieve impartiality through a process of question asking.”