News

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.”

Professor of Law Emeritus William Banks speaks with CBS News About the Legal Implications of the Third January 6th Committee Hearing

Professor of Law Emeritus William Banks

Professor of Law Emeritus William Banks spoke with CBS News anchor Jamie Yuccas regarding the legal implications of the findings from the third hearing of the House select committee hearings on the January 6th Capitol riots.

According to the House committee investigating the attack on the U.S. Capitol, aides to former Vice President Mike Pence revealed that conservative lawyer John Eastman pressured Pence to reject certification of the 2020 election. 

“I think Eastman revealed through Mr. Pence’s council that he knew full well that Pence did not have the legal authority to refuse to certify the election,” Banks said. “So he attempted to interfere with the execution of a federal official, the vice president of the United States, through a dubious legal theory that he himself knew not to be valid.” Given the fact that Eastman later went on to seek a pardon, Banks believes he knew that “he was in hot water.”

When asked if we will see any prosecutions from this trial, Banks indicated that it is hard to say at this point. “It’s not up to Congress to decide if criminal cases are brought. It is up to the Justice Department. The Justice Department can decide whether to act on its own, wait for Congressional referrals and evaluate those referrals, or they can simply decide not to initiate prosecutions in several of these instances that are the focus of the hearing.”

Banks does not believe that there will be prosecutions against the high-ranking officials, as they are tough cases to prove given an obstruction case requires an intention to violate the law. 

ABA Journal Features Comments from Professor Nina Kohn on the Biden Administration’s Proposed Nursing Home Reforms

Professor Nina Kohn

As chair of the ABA Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice’s Elder Affairs Committee, Professor Nina Kohn has helped draw attention to policies that closely align with nursing home reforms the Biden administration announced in February. 

Featured in this ABA Journal article, Kohn explains, “the ABA has played a leadership role historically in thinking through the law around long-term care. That has been in part through particular entities within the ABA, such as the Commission on Law and Aging, which has been an important resource for advocates, but also through some discreet resolutions the ABA has adopted over the years.”

More than 200,000 lives of nursing home residents and staff have been taken by COVID-19 in the past two years. Due to this severe impact, the administration has tasked the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office (HHS) with developing and implementing reforms aimed to improve the safety and quality of nursing home care, hold nursing homes accountable for the care they provide, and make the quality of care and facility ownership more transparent so that potential residents and their loved ones can make informed decisions about care.

“For decades now, the ABA has understood how important enforcement is in this space,” Kohn says. “On paper, nursing home residents have robust rights related to the quality of care and quality of life. The problem is that there is ineffective enforcement of those rights and, as a result, what are on paper very clear requirements end up being treated more than aspirational goals.”

The Hon. James E. Baker Discusses Biden’s Use of the DPA with the Economist

The Hon. James E. Baker

President Joe Biden has repeatedly invoked the Defense Production Act (DPA), previously used mainly as a procurement tool for the armed forces, to manage the economy throughout his current presidency.

Speaking to the Economist, the Hon. James E. Baker, Director of the Syracuse University Institute for Security Policy and Law, explains, “given the depth of America’s supply problems today, it is good public policy to test the limits of the DPA, to see what it can accomplish.” 

In March, Biden used the DPA to encourage the domestic production of minerals needed to make batteries for electric vehicles. A few months later in May, he called upon the law to ramp up the production of infant formula in the face of the shortage across the country. He also used it to spur the production of clean energy such as solar power.

William C. Banks, professor emeritus, joined CBS News to discuss the legal implications of House select committee hearings on the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

Professor of Law Emeritus William Banks

Professor Emeritus William C. Banks joined CBS News live before the first House select committee hearing on the January 6 Capitol riot. 

“I think the hearings are going to be another important component of establishing a historical record. It’s about preserving our most important institutions of our democracy. It’s fundamental to our democratic society that we’ve had for nearly 250 years and when that comes under threat as it did just this past year, I think the whole world pays attention,” says Banks.

Professor Roy Gutterman L’00 Discusses the Potential Future of Defamation Law with People Magazine After the Depp v. Heard Verdict

Professor Roy Gutterman

Professor Roy Gutterman L’00, Director of the Tully Center for Free Speech, tells People Magazine that the recent verdict that Amber Heard defamed Johnny Depp in her December 2018 op-ed for the Washington Post was “shocking” to some.

“At this point, it is difficult to assess the long-term effect this decision will have on defamation law and whether it will chill future speakers and writers from addressing potentially controversial issues,” Gutterman said. “I think it might have a chilling effect. The defamation claim is based on a statement in a newspaper column. The weeks of testimony were at times lurid and even entertaining, but I’m not sure it adequately proved anything beyond the fact that two movie stars had an extremely volatile relationship.”

According to Heard, the American Civil Liberties Union wrote the first draft of the op-ed, and teams of lawyers vetted it before finalizing the story. Heard later testified that she did not write or approve the headline used in the online version, which differs from the one used in the print newspaper as it included the term “sexual violence.”

As a result of the trial, the jury awarded Depp $15 million in damages, which the judge later reduced to $10.35 million due to a state law in Virginia. Heard was awarded $2 million in her defamation countersuit, and plans to appeal the verdict.

The U.S. News and World Report Lists the College of Law’s Burton Blatt Institute as One of Two Leading Centers in the Country for Disability Rights

Burton Blatt Institute Logo

The Syracuse University College of Law’s Burton Blatt Institute was recently featured in a U.S. News and World Report Article as one of two of the most prominent law schools in the country with specific centers or programs focused on disability rights or advocacy.

The article contains advice for law school applicants with disabilities, offering them tips to successfully navigate the admissions process and the full law school experience. Topics range from disability accommodations for the LSAT and in law school, to the option to disclose disabilities as a law school applicant and programs and resources for law students with disabilities.

Professor Peter Blanck, chairman of the Burton Blatt Institute, notes, “applying to law school requires strong self-advocacy and patience that puts a unique burden on students with disabilities.” Depending on an applicant’s specific disabilities, those burdens can vary, from stress and time burdens to practical barriers. Not all disabilities are visible, and some applicants may also have impairments such as cognitive or learning disabilities and/or mental health issues.

“Just be the best lawyer you can be,” Blanck advises. “In a competitive legal environment, it is important to have a basic grounding to be a well-rounded lawyer.”

Professor Elizabeth Kubala Awarded Grant from New York Health Foundation to Attend U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims Judicial Conference

Professor Kubala with 3Ls Abby Gorzlancyk, Sunny Lostritto, and Ryan Carson

Professor Elizabeth Kubala, Executive Director of the Betty and Michael D. Wohl Veterans Legal Clinic, was recently awarded a grant from the New York Health Foundation (NYHealth) to attend the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) 15th Judicial Conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. 

A statewide health foundation in New York, NYHealth plays a key role in building the field of professionals working to improve veterans’ health in New York State. NYHealth hopes not only to support those already engaged in these efforts but also to attract new professionals to the field. By providing funding for professional opportunities like conference attendance, NYHealth supports veterans’ advocacy leaders by enabling them to learn, grow, share, and advance their work. 

A part of the yearly Judicial Conferences held for Judges of the court, this year’s program focused on the challenging landscape of veterans’ law. Highlights included guest speakers such as U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth and the Honorable Denis McDonough Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Topics ranged from legal trends to the Appeals Modernization Act and ethics. The event also featured discussions with the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Board of Veterans’ Appeals.

“As a veterans legal clinic director, I gained tremendous knowledge and insights through this conference,” said Kubala. “Collaborative opportunities like the CAVC Judicial Conference help us refine the way we both assist our veteran clients and teach our student-attorneys.  I’m thankful for NYHealth’s generosity in supporting conference attendance at such an impactful convening of legal experts focused on improving access to veterans’ healthcare and benefits.”

The conference also served as an official Continuing Legal Education training for Kubala and other veteran law practitioners.

Professor Nina Kohn Offers Comments to Lever News on Nursing Home Deregulation in Florida

Professor Nina Kohn

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis recently extended protections for the nursing home industry from COVID-19-related liability lawsuits, in addition to reducing the amount of resident care the facilities are required to provide residents. According to Professor Nina Kohn, this is a dangerous step in the wrong direction for resident well-being.

“Research shows that both staffing levels and the availability of skilled nursing staff are important predictors of the quality of care that nursing home residents receive,” said Kohn, an expert in elder law. “Florida’s new law reduces the number of hours of certified nursing staff time that facilities must provide to residents each day. This opens the door to nursing homes substituting trained staff for essentially unskilled labor. That is dangerous for residents and a clear step in the wrong direction.”

The full Lever News article includes additional details on the nationwide pattern of shielding nursing homes from lawsuits, and how some facilities are reducing the quantity and quality of care to cut costs.