College of Law Alum Martin (Marty) Feinman L'83, director of delinquency training with the Juvenile Rights Practice at The Legal Aid Society of NY, re
College of Law Alum Martin (Marty) Feinman L'83, director of delinquency training with the Juvenile Rights Practice at The Legal Aid Society of NY, recently wrote an opinion article for the New York Law Journal on the lessons to be learned from the Central Park 5 Case.
ADA Live! Podcast to Feature Sen. Tom Harkin on July 3, 2019
The Hon. Tom Harkin—former Senator and Congressman, veteran, author, attorney, and chief sponsor of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)—will be the featured guest on the July 3, 2019, broadcast of ADA Live! , a podcast produced by the Syracuse University Burton Blatt Institute (BBI) and Southeast ADA Center. University Professor Peter Blanck, Chairman of BBI, will interview Sen. Harkin in celebration of the 29th anniversary of this historic civil rights legislation.
Harkin served Iowa in the U.S. Senate from 1984 until his retirement in January 2015, making him the longest serving Democratic senator from his state. Previously, Harkin served 10 years in the U.S. House of Representatives representing Iowa’s fifth congressional district. He is now Senior Advisor to the Harkin Institute for Public Policy and Citizen Engagement at Drake University, Des Moines, IA.
Early in his Senate career, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy asked Harkin to craft legislation to protect the civil rights of millions of Americans with physical and mental disabilities. Harkin knew firsthand about the challenges facing people with disabilities from his late brother, Frank, who was deaf from an early age. What emerged from that process would later become Harkin’s signature legislative achievement: the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Considered the "Emancipation Proclamation for people with disabilities," the ADA changed the landscape of America by prohibiting discrimination against people with disabilities in all aspects of public life, including employment, schools, transportation, local government programs, and places of public accommodation. To preserve the intent of the ADA after court rulings weakened its standards, Harkin and former Sen. Orrin Hatch introduced the ADA Amendments Act to ensure continuing protections from discrimination for all Americans with disabilities. It was signed into law in 2008.
In the podcast, Harkin will discuss how the ADA legislation came about, its impact over the last 29 years, and the future of civil rights protections for the more than 60 million people with disabilities living in the United States.
For more information, contact the Southeast ADA Center at 404.541.9001 or visit adalive.org.
Professor William C. Banks: Trump's Assertion "May Be Unlawful"
(Associated Press | June 13, 2019) An expert in constitutional law tells the Associated Press that President Donald Trump's assertion that he would be open to accepting a foreign power's help in his 2020 campaign is not appropriate and "it may be unlawful."
Law Library Closed: July 4
The Law Library will be closed on Thurs., July 4 in observance of the Independence Day holiday. The service desks will re-open on Fri., July 5 at 8am.
Assistant Dean Andrew Horsfall L'10 Receives Fulbright to Attend International Education Administrators Seminar in Germany
Over a few weeks in October and November 2019, Assistant Dean of International Programs Andrew Horsfall L'10 will travel to Berlin, Germany, to attend the 2019-2020 International Education Administrators Seminar. After a competitive process, Horsfall was awarded a J. William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board grant—funded jointly by the US Congress and the Fulbright Commission in Germany—to attend the intensive, two-week seminar.
What is the International Education Administrators (IEA) Seminar?
IEA seminars promote cross-culture dialog among higher education professionals and government officials. They are designed to help us create connections with and to learn from the societal, cultural, and higher education systems of other countries, as well as establish professional networks among higher education colleagues from all over the globe. Fulbright offers IEA seminars in Germany, France, India, Japan, and South Korea.
Are there specific goals you want to achieve for the College?
I expect the seminar will serve as a catalyst to explore and develop new international projects and partnerships for the College of Law and future collaborations for the University. Our faculty are innovative and globally-minded, and Germany offers a rich landscape of opportunities to pursue.
I also want to advance the College's commitment to internationalization by expanding its portfolio of student-centered programs that promote exposure to diverse perspectives, the free exchange of ideas, and an appreciation for the Rule of Law.
An attractive feature of Fulbright’s IEA seminar is the opportunity for candid discussion with US and German faculty and administrators regarding their experiences cultivating sustainable institutional relationships. I look forward to fresh ideas arising from these conversations, as well as from our exchanges regarding common challenges in delivering high quality higher education, such as changing student demographics, evolving needs of employers, and emerging technology.
What activities are scheduled?
I will join a group that will spend the first days of the seminar in Berlin. During this first segment, we will have an introduction to the German higher education system and its institutions and have ample networking opportunities within and across academic institutions, government agencies, and sponsoring organizations. The group will then be divided into subgroups to visit different institutions of higher education in Germany, before it reunites in Frankfurt.
Why did the German seminar interest you in particular?
Germany’s reputation as a global leader in emerging technology and innovation, coupled with its critical role in European geopolitics and security, make it a particularly ideal environment in which to explore trends in higher education and future academic partnerships.
This is particularly true given the cutting-edge focus areas of some of the College’s research centers and institutes, such as the Innovation Law Center, Syracuse Intellectual Property Law Institute, and the Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism.
Commentary: Legal Tech—Some Initial Perspectives from Germany
As in the US, law firms, businesses, and bar associations are grappling with issues of legal tech. My preliminary conversations over the past week with attorneys and academics in Hamburg, Germany, particularly at Bucerius Law School, reveals a vibrant debate over the design of legal practice, the unauthorized practice of law, and the bundling of legal services with technology. The Center for Legal Professions and the Center for Transnational IP, Media, and Technology Law and Policy at Bucerius are active hot spots for research and activism on these ongoing issues.
Recent developments in the US demonstrate the role of legal tech in document and case management. Wilson Sonsini’s announcement last month about a shift in its document software is one example. Axiom, a San Francisco based company that bridges in house and law firm representation, illustrates how new business forms address new ways for providing flexible legal services to business clients.
In Germany, the use of software applications to address compensation issues have challenged conventions on the delivery of legal services.Flight Right, software based services designed to protect consumers who are harmed by flight cancellations, has raised questions about the unauthorized practice of law. Software based services designed to compensate workers and renters who have been overcharged also have had bar associations at the federal and state levels concerned. Various working groups have made proposals for reforms to allow for more flexible provisions of legal services. I am studying these various proposals now and will comment on them in future posts.
In the meantime, innovative legal firms like Schnittker Möllman in Hamburg are leaders in integrating these new software and proto-AI approaches to legal services with traditional models of legal practice. One lesson from both the US and Germany is while legal software might empower clients, there is still a need to bundle the software with legal services. Trained attorneys help to make the applications more effective, a point that some may challenge but, in my assessment, will remain true. How such bundling occurs, however, is a matter of the market for and regulation of legal services.
Hunt Joins Hodgson Russ
Kenneth Hunt joined Hodgson Russ as a senior associate in the Trusts and Estates practice in Buffalo, NY.
Thomas Joins Bond, Schoeneck & King
Megan Thomas joined Bond, Schoeneck & King as an associate in the firm's School Districts practice.
Moynahan Promoted to Chief Deputy City Attorney
Karen Moynahan was promoted to Chief Deputy City Attorney for the Contracts, Utilities, and Environmental Section of the City of Portland, OR.
Sinsabaugh Joins Certilman, Balin Adler & Hyman
Brian Sinsabaugh joined Certilman, Balin Adler & Hyman as an associate in the firm's Litigation and Land Use practice groups.
Lerner Named Among DBusiness' "Top Lawyers"
David Lerner was listed among DBusiness' "Top Lawyers" for the metro Detroit area in the area of Bankruptcy & Creditor/Debtor Rights Law.
Mastroleo Joins Bond, Schoeneck & King
Adam Mastroleo joined Bond, Schoeneck & King as an associate in the firm's Labor and Employment department.
Jacobson Joins Bond, Schoeneck & King
Nick Jacobson joined Bond, Schoeneck & King as an associate in the firm's Labor and Employment department.
Syracuse University College of Law Alumnus Frank Ryan L'94 Named US Chairman of DLA Piper
Syracuse University College of Law Alumnus Frank Ryan L'94 has been named the next US Chairman of multinational law firm DLA Piper, the 4th largest law firm in the world, with offices in more than 40 countries. In his new position, Ryan will be responsible for the firm’s US operations, which includes more than 1,500 lawyers and nearly 3,000 total employees in more than 30 offices.
Ryan became a Partner in DLA Piper’s New York City office in 2010 and is currently Global Co-Chair and US Co-Chair of the firm's Intellectual Property and Technology Practice and Deputy Chair of its Media, Sports, and Entertainment Sector. He is also a member of the firm’s US Executive Committee and Global Board.
Ryan is known for his broad experience in high-stakes litigation involving intellectual property, major commercial matters, and sovereign issues, as well as in counseling clients on media and sports deals and intellectual property portfolio development and protection. The long list of high-profile clients he has represented includes Disney, ABC, TomTom, Pac-12, Nike, ESPN, beIN Media Group, Al Jazeera, Medtronic, and ConMed. Ryan is also handling significant matters related to the 2022 World Cup in Qatar.
A 1990 Syracuse University bachelor of science graduate, Ryan was a four-year varsity letter winner in wrestling. At the College of Law, he distinguished himself academically and as an advocate, becoming a member of the Order of the Coif and the Justinian Honorary Law Society, receiving a Gerald Resnick Memorial Scholarship, and participating on advocacy trial teams. After graduating magna cum laude in 1994, Ryan joined Nixon Peabody, eventually becoming head of its Litigation Department.
Ryan is a member of the College of Law Board of Advisors and a 2017 recipient of a Syracuse Law Honors Award from the Syracuse University Law Alumni Association. He is a frequent guest lecturer and panelist for the College of Law’s Entertainment and Sports Law Society’s annual symposium.
"On behalf of the College of Law, I congratulate Frank Ryan on this significant achievement. His accession to this role is not only a personal accomplishment but also one that reflects well on the College's strength and legacy in intellectual property law," says Dean Craig M. Boise. "I’m particularly pleased that Frank has remained committed to the College of Law philanthropically and programmatically. He has been eager to share his wisdom and his vision with our students and the rest of the College of Law community as a guest speaker and as a member of our Board of Advisors. Frank is a consummate example of what it means to be an Orange lawyer."
DLA Piper's partnership voted to elect Ryan as US Chairman on May 22, 2019. He will assume his new role effective Jan. 1, 2021, for a term of four years.
Commentary: Jean-Pierre Bemba’s Request for Compensation for Damages from the International Criminal Court
By David M. Crane
(Re-published from Jurist | June 9, 2019) Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo (Bemba) is the leader of the Movement for the Liberation of Congo (MLC) and was the commander-in-chief of its military forces during the Central African Bush War from 2003-2004, during which the MLC was accused of committing war crimes, as well as, crimes against humanity.
Bemba was arrested on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity for his role as the leader of the MLC near Brussels in May 2008 and was handed over to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on July 3, 2008. Bemba was held by the ICC for over two years before his trial began in November 2010, throughout the duration of his trial which lasted until 2014, and still after the conclusion of his trial, until his convictions on March 21, 2016.
The ICC sentenced Bemba to 18 years detention for war crimes and crimes against humanity convictions, plus an additional year and a €290,000 fine for witness tampering.
Bemba appealed his convictions in 2016, citing procedural and legal errors in the lower court judge’s ruling, which Bemba’s counsel said should have resulted in a mistrial. The ICC chamber to which Bemba appealed found on June 8, 2018 that the trial chamber had ignored significant testimonial evidence proving that Bemba had a limited ability to investigate and punish war crimes in the Central African Republic during and after the violence in 2003 and 2004. This conclusion lead to Bemba’s acquittal.
Bemba submitted a request for compensation to the ICC on March 8, 2019. The ICC Prosecutor and Registrar asked the judges to dismiss this claim, but the Pre-Trial Chamber II judges presiding over the claim denied this request.
Bemba’s claim totaled €68.8 million, including: €12 million for the period of his alleged unlawful incarceration, €10 million in aggravated damages, €4.2 million in legal fees, with the remaining €42.4 million being for property damage.
Bemba’s request for property damage compensation stems from those losses consequent to Bemba’s arrest and detention as well as those losses caused by the ICC’s mistakes in managing Bemba’s frozen assets, as the assets seized by the ICC upon Bemba’s conviction were allowed to rot.
The provisions of the law are that Article 85 of the ICC’s Rome Statute governs compensation claims by persons who have been arrested pursuant to the ICC’s jurisdiction or convicted by the ICC. The governing clause provides two primary bases for bringing claims for compensation: the first is found in Article 85(1) while the second is laid out in Article 85(3). Article 85(1) of the Rome Statute states that “[a]nyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation.” Article 85(3) is vaguer and states that “[i]n exceptional circumstances, where the court finds conclusive facts showing that there has been a grave and manifest miscarriage of justice, it may in its discretion award compensation . . . according to the criteria provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to a person who has been released from detention following a final decision of acquittal or a termination of the proceedings for that reason.”
Claims for compensation must follow the ICC’s Rules of Evidence and Procedure, specifically Rule 173(2), which requires that a request for compensation be submitted to the court no later than six months from the date the person making the request was notified of the decision of the court concerning unlawful arrest or detention; reversal of a conviction; or existence of a grave and manifest miscarriage of justice.
Any party seeking compensation on such grounds must submit a written request containing the grounds for and the amount of compensation being sought to the ICC’s Presidency. The ICC then designates a three-judge chamber to consider the request. Rule 174 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence provides that judges handling such requests may hold a hearing or determine the matter based on the request along with any written observations by the prosecutor and the party who filed the request.
In cases in which damages are awarded, judges shall take into consideration “the consequences of the grave and manifest miscarriage of justice on the personal, family, and social professional situation of the claimant.” However, it has been acknowledged that there is no exact formula for calculating such damages.
The ICC does not have precedent in awarding damages to those seeking compensation under the court’s jurisdiction, and there does not seem to be a set test to determine whether a party seeking compensation from the ICC will receive such damages – at this point, it is purely discretionary. However, it does seem as if the ICC tends to look to whether the claim for damages is viable under Article 85(1) or 85(3) of the Rome Statute and proper under Rule 173(2) before considering the amount of compensation requested …
David M. Crane is a Syracuse University College of Law Distinguished Scholar in Residence.
Professor Nina Kohn Publishes on Elder Care and Intra-Family Contracts
Kohn, Nina. "For Love and Affection: Elder Care and the Law's Denial of Intra-Family Contracts." Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 54 (2019).
As the US population ages, writes David M. Levy L'48 Professor of Law Nina Kohn in Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, demand for care providers for older adults is rapidly growing.
Although the law’s treatment of care contracts between older adults and their family caregivers has substantial implications for the country’s ability to meet this demand, there has been no prior empirical examination of the law’s current treatment of such agreements. Kohn's article fills that gap by assessing how courts and other legal actors treat intra-family agreements to pay family members for elder care.
A look into a long-ignored area of case law—Medicaid eligibility determinations—reveals that courts, administrative law judges, and state regulators typically attach little or no monetary value to elder care provided by family members. Rather, payments for caregiving are routinely treated as fraudulent transfers. The result is that, in the name of combatting Medicaid fraud, states penalize older adults who pay for their own care.
Treating family-provided elder care as lacking monetary value stands in sharp contrast to the high cost of elder care purchased on the open market and is at odds with states’ increased willingness to directly pay family care providers. Kohn shows that this incongruence can be partially explained by public distaste for Medicaid planning and distrust of agents acting on behalf of older adults. Entrenched stereotypes about care work and related expectations about familial care also contribute to the law’s refusal to recognize these agreements and the economic value of care provided under them.
In her article, Kohn offers lessons for social policy, legal theory, and legal practice. On a policy level, it shows that states are engaged in counterproductive behavior that will discourage the very type of family care they purport to encourage. On a theoretical level, it indicates that attitudes toward care work and courts’ willingness to enforce contracts between family members have not changed to the extent commonly described by family law scholars.
Finally, at a practical level, Kohn suggests that attorneys should adapt the advice they give clients to better account for distrust of agents.
Syracuse University College of Law Alumni to Receive Prestigious University Awards
The Syracuse University Alumni Association and the Office of Alumni Engagement has chosen two College of Law alumni to receive prestigious University awards at Orange Central 2019, for achievements that are described as "truly exceptional". The awards celebration takes place Sept, 13, 2019, at the OnCenter ballroom in downtown Syracuse, NY.
The Melvin A. Eggers Senior Alumni Award is presented to alumni who graduated more than 50 years ago and who have demonstrated loyalty and service to the University. The 2019 Eggers Award will be awarded to Ronald Goldfarb '54, L'56 and his wife Joanne Goldfarb '57. Joanne is an accomplished architect, while Ronald has enjoyed a varied and successful career as an attorney, author, and literary agent. Together, they have a demonstrated history of philanthropy and have donated more than 1,500 books from their personal collection to the College of Law Library.
College of Law SULAA Board Member Kevin Belbey ’13, G’16, L’16—Director of Sports Broadcasting at The Montag Group—will receive the Generation Orange Award. Introduced in 2013, the Generation Orange Award recognizes recent graduates for their continued commitment to the University.
"We are very proud and fortunate that two of our alumni have been chosen for these prestigious SU awards," says Dean Craig M. Boise. "These awards are a testament to their achievements and their steadfast support of the College and University."
Syracuse University College of Law Announces Summer DCEx Placements
On June 5, 2019, Professor Terry L. Turnipseed, Faculty Director of Externship Programs, announced that he had placed the last of 15 law students in top Washington, DC, externship program (DCEx) placements.
"We have participants in the Department of Justice; two in the Department of Homeland Security; in the US Attorney’s Office for DC, the largest in the country; in the Patent and Trademark Office, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and National Labor Relations Board; and in a top 10 public defender service, among other excellent law firms, nonprofits, and judicial positions. One-third of the placements are for students of color."
Turnipseed notes that College of Law alumni have stepped up to assist with placements in the Capital. "Four high-level alums are placement attorneys this semester: Dennis L. Phillips L’81, Michael Walls L’84, James T. Dehn L’98, and Patrick Oot L’01." In addition, says Turnipseed, Allessio Evangelista L’95, Principal Assistant US Attorney for DC, played a role in the placement at that office.
Federal Government Placements
3L Casey Bessemer
US Patent and Trademark Office
1L Skylar Salim
US Department of Homeland Security, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement
2L Cody Lind
US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Housing and Civil Enforcement Section
3L Kevin Risch
US Department of Justice, US Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia
2L Aly Kozma
US Department of Homeland Security, Office of General Counsel
2L Kim Manas
US Commodity Futures Trading Commission
3L Rodney Dorilas
National Labor Relations Board, Office of General Counsel
3L Sarah Everhart
Employment and Training Administration, Office of Management and Administrative Services
Local Government Placements
1L Robert Boehlert
Office of Public Defender (Montgomery County Maryland)
1L Brandon Baker
The Hon. Dennis L. Phillips L’81, US Administrative Law Judge, US Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission
Law Firm Placements
1L Sheridan Su
3L Saeed Khunaizi
Garfield Law Group LLP (Immigration Law)
2L Kaitlyn Crobar
American Chemistry Council, Department of Regulatory and Technical Affairs
1L Shane Kelly
Electronic Discovery Institute
1L Roland Lindmayer
Insured Retirement Institute
Syracuse University Named a US Intelligence Community Center for Academic Excellence
The US Intelligence Community has designated Syracuse University as one of eight national Intelligence Community Centers for Academic Excellence (ICCAE), with a funding award of $1.5 million over five years. Established in 2005 by Congress, the ICCAE program is designed to increase the number of culturally and ethnically diverse, multi-disciplinary professionals in the intelligence community. Syracuse University is one of only eight universities nationwide—including the University of Arizona, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, and University of Southern California—and only one of two private universities selected.
In its proposal, Syracuse University will lead a consortium of schools—known as the Partnership for Educational Results/Syracuse University Adaptive, Diverse and Ethical Intelligence Community Professionals (PER/SUADE)—to recruit and educate talented, diverse students interested in public service careers in the intelligence field. The consortium’s partner schools include Norfolk State University, a historically black university; The Grove School of Engineering at The City College of New York and other institutions.
This multi-faceted recruitment and education initiative leverages the University’s leadership and strengths in a wide range of security-related disciplines, cutting across STEM, public affairs, law, forensics, military affairs, disability studies, and language and cultural studies. Building dynamic and sustained partnerships with the consortium partners will enable PER/SUADE to share complementary strengths and attract diverse students, like military veterans, as well as historically underrepresented students, including women; ethnically, culturally and religiously diverse students; and students with disabilities.
“It is an honor for Syracuse University to be selected for this auspicious designation,” says Vice Chancellor and Provost Michele Wheatly. “This recognition acknowledges the tremendous research of faculty members engaged in these interdisciplinary fields and the strength of our academic enterprises committed to supporting a diverse set of scholars in the classroom and the field.”
Affiliated faculty members will support PER/SUADE’s mission by developing an intelligence-related curriculum, including major and minor degree options and a certificate program; professional development and faculty research opportunities; and culturally immersive experiences.
“This significant designation as an academic center of excellence and funding demonstrate scholarship and the impact of the University’s broadening research portfolio,” says Vice President of Research John Liu. “Syracuse University has a long history and commitment to excellence in research and education in public service and to the highly regarded values of diversity and ethics. Our faculty across various interdisciplinary fields are well positioned to further advance scholarship and education in global understanding and elevate our work in educating under-resourced students with diverse experiences and backgrounds.”
The program will provide students interested in pursuing a career in the area of intelligence with a strong academic foundation and experiences that will increase their success in finding a career in any of the US intelligence agencies. Along with their studies, ICCAE students will have opportunities to study abroad at more than 45 locations, with language instruction, cultural immersion and regional studies, and to participate in seminars, career talks, field trips and conferences.
“The goal of national security is to defend liberty as well as our physical security,” says Hon. James E. Baker, Co-Principal Investigator, Professor of Law, Professor of Public Administration, and Director of the Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism (INSCT). “This program will benefit our nation and all who live in it by producing a diverse group of adaptive and insightful intelligence professionals who hold an unwavering commitment to public service with a keen understanding of ethics and the rule of law. These values and virtues were embodied in the life of Judge Jack Downey [a US intelligence officer who was captured and detained in Chinese prisons during and after the Korean War], whose service is recognized in the form of the Downey Fellowship for academically excellent students.”
The partnership consortium will take a three-part approach to address current educational needs and challenges for the intelligence community. The approach recognizes that emerging professionals need to adapt to the demands of highly dynamic and changing environments; acknowledges that diverse perspectives and experiences enhance a person’s ability to analyze situations; and recognizes that the next generation of the best security and intelligence professionals will put ethics and the rule of law at the forefront of their analysis and practice.
“At its heart this effort aims to build a diverse workforce for the intelligence community that represents the full spectrum of our country’s population—reflected ethnically and culturally, and by gender, through sustainable national security education programs that will complement students’ primary areas of study,” says Vice Admiral Robert Murrett (Ret.), Principal Investigator, Maxwell School Professor of Practice, and Deputy Director of INSCT. “It will leverage contributions from virtually all the schools and colleges at Syracuse University, and provide additional career opportunities for our students.”
Professor Corri Zoli Explores Terror's Organizational Tactics in Terrorism and Political Violence Article
Zoli, Corri & Aliya H. Williams G'17. "ISIS Cohort Transnational Travels and EU Security Gaps: Reconstructing the 2015 Paris Attack Preplanning and Outsource Strategy." Terrorism and Political Violence, 31 (June 2019).
In this article Zoli and Williams explore the underappreciated role of organizational tactics in terrorist violence in an understudied single case: ISIS’s execution of the Nov. 13, 2015 Paris attacks.
It is one of the first systemic reconstructions of the journeys made by two ISIS strike cohorts in the coordinated attacks, as teams traveled from the Levant to Europe. In contrast to other high-profile attacks, terrorism scholars have not undertaken a detailed reconstruction of this event, even while open source information is now available. By examining the transnational travels of foreign terrorist fighters, the authors identify ISIS’s distinctive terrorist outsourcing strategy in which operatives used their experiences to adapt to changing security conditions, while EU governments revealed limited responses.
Both elements in this tightly-knit dynamic—terrorist outsourcing savvy using FTFs and EU security policy failures—were necessary to achieve this high-profile attack.
Zoli's and Williams' essay contributes to descriptive empirical and theoretical knowledge of terrorist tactical innovation and adaptive operational learning, as these capacities are enhanced by on-the-ground organized networks to increase organizational (versus so-called "lone wolf") campaign success. By using a single case interdisciplinary and exploratory framework, the authors claim that terrorism studies can delve deeper into superficially understood phenomena to isolate concepts with future cross-case value, such as cohorts and tactical adaptation.
Department of the Interior Director of the Departmental Ethics Office Scott de la Vega L’91 Kicks-off DCEx Summer Seminar Series
DCEx students with Scott de la Vega L'94
On May 28, 2019, Distinguished Guest Lecturer Scott de la Vega L’94 hosted the Summer 2019 DC Externship Program’s first seminar at the Department of the Interior (DOI).
de la Vega currently serves as both the DOI’s Director of the Departmental Ethics Office and Designated Agency Ethics Official. Prior to joining the DOI, de la Vega served in various legal positions at the White House, including as Ethics Counsel to Vice President Joseph Biden L’68 and the Office of White House Counsel, as well as Managing Counsel for Operations in the Executive Office of the President.
Prior to his lecture, de la Vega took participants on a private tour of the Main Interior Building, including its rooftop view of Washington, D.C. During the presentation, de la Vega discussed the DOI’s purpose and mission, his official role within the agency, and his personal experiences as a law student and an attorney. “Participants left the seminar with a solid understanding of what it means to be a government ethics attorney and the importance of upholding ethical values throughout their legal careers,” says Terry Turnipseed, Faculty Director of Externship Programs.
Two 2019 LL.M. Graduates Selected for the Edmund S. Muskie Internship Program
Chiora Taktakishvili and Kate Halenko
Master of Laws in American Law graduates Kate Halenko LL.M. ’19 (Ukraine) and Chiora Taktakishvili LL.M. ’19 (Georgia) recently began their summer placements in the Edmund S. Muskie Internship Program. The program extends their time in the United States beyond graduation in May to enable them to participate in internships that are aligned with their academic and career goals.
“The Muskie program is an excellent opportunity for Kate and Chiora to gain valuable hands-on experiences that put into practice what they have been learning in the classroom,” said Andrew Horsfall, Assistant Dean of International Programs, Syracuse University College of Law. “The goal is for the students to return to their home countries with even greater knowledge and perspectives in their chosen fields of law.”
Halenko is interning at Sayari Analytics in Washington, DC, as a Eurasia Team Analyst to support ongoing projects for government, financial sector, and multinational clients. She is working with a team of regional and subject-matter experts, tackling complex investigations of illicit networks across the world.
“After an extensive career in human rights protection and humanitarian relief operations, I studied at Syracuse Law to focus on the other side of the human rights equation, namely national security and counterterrorism studies. It seems odd that how in our turbulent times and fragile world people working on either side of the barricades, so to speak, rarely talk to each other, except for attacking each other's positions. I am interested in bridging that chasm with the help of changing current policies,” says Halenko. “I hope this internship will make it easier for me to pursue the job of my dream after valuable experiences at Sayari.”
Taktakishvili is interning at the Columbia University Institute for the Study of Human Rights. She is working with the Human Rights Advocates program, which brings prominent human rights defenders from all over the world to the Columbia University to provide grassroots leaders the tools, knowledge, access, and networks to promote the realization of human rights and strengthen their respective organizations.
“For human rights defenders in countries with poor human rights records, sometimes international partnership and networks are the only support system available. My plan is to enable Georgian-American peer-to-peer networking and cooperation through human rights education projects, while also contributing to filling the gaps in human rights education, especially in minority rights and non-discrimination law,” says Taktakishvili. “The Muskie Internship program provides a unique opportunity to fulfill my future carrier goals, be immersed in an American working environment and test our new knowledge and academic skills in practice.”
The Edmund S. Muskie Internship Program is a summer internship program funded by the U.S. Department of State that provides emerging leaders from Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia with the opportunity to gain real-world experience complementing and enriching their graduate studies in the United States.
Extern Attends California State Assembly Hearings
On April 9, 2019, Amar Deol L'19 traveled to Sacramento, CA, with San Francisco Public Defender Mano Raju to attend California State Assembly Hearings regarding AB 1636, a probable cause bill that the former San Francisco defender had worked on. While at the hearings, Deol and others had the opportunity to voice support for the bill.
“It was a good learning experience to see another side of lawyering,” says Deol, who was a Spring 2019 extern at the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office. “I’m so glad I took this opportunity to get outside of the [Public Defender’s] Office to see how this processed played out.”
Diverse: Issues In Higher Education Highlights 3+3 Agreement with HBCU
Syracuse Law Furthers Commitment to Access, Diversity in Legal Profession
(Diverseeducation.com | June 1, 2019) A new agreement between Syracuse University College of Law and Clark Atlanta University, Morehouse College and Spelman College will fulfill a dual objective: diversifying the student body of the law school – and thus the legal profession – while also providing a pipeline for students from the three historically Black institutions to accelerate the time to their bachelor’s and juris doctor degrees.
The 3+3 agreement with the Atlanta University Center (AUC) schools would decrease the time it takes for students to earn their J.D. from seven years to six, reducing the cost of their education and allowing them to enter the workforce sooner. As part of Syracuse’s commitment to access and diversity in legal education, law school officials note that the program will additionally provide comprehensive outreach and supports to AUC students earlier in their higher education journey.
“While students are in this program – and they can indicate their interest in participating in this program as soon as they begin their undergraduate program – we intend to provide for them the kind of exposure to the practice and the profession, to lawyers that will help them master some of the subtle things about the way that law practice works, the way that law firms work [and] a lot of the language and the lingo that’s related to law so that they’re better prepared to be in law school and have a little bit of a leg up,” said Craig M. Boise, dean and professor of law at the Syracuse University College of Law.
Further, selected students will receive scholarships to offset the cost of their legal education, preparation for the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT) and the opportunity to travel to Syracuse to get a sense of where “they will hopefully be studying law,” Boise said. Officials similarly anticipate giving AUC students access to Syracuse Law’s alumni base in Atlanta so they can shadow lawyers in practice or secure internships.
Another component of the new 3+3 agreement will be programming on “hot topics” in law. Officials aim for Syracuse law faculty members to travel to Atlanta to conduct presentations with students; some presentations may be day-long events, Boise said.
“We look forward to exploring those ideas with our partner schools as we move forward and as this program grows and expands,” he said. “We are not just saying, ‘Here we are. Come to the law school after your third year of undergrad,’” he said. “But we really want to provide assistance to students in making the transition into legal education.”
Administrators from the Atlanta HBCUs hailed the partnership with Syracuse for its mutual objective to boost their students’ academic and career success in the legal realm while saving them money.
“I am excited by the opportunities that this program will provide for our students who are interested in pursuing careers in law,” said Dr. Matthew B. Platt, chair and associate professor in the Department of Political Science at Morehouse. “This program is a testament to Dean Boise’s and Syracuse’s commitment to the recruitment of Black students, and I hope it serves as a model for law schools across the nation" ...
Syracuse University College of Law Students Invited to Top Gun 2019
For the third year in a row, Syracuse University College of Law has been invited to send advocacy students to compete in the prestigious 2019 Top Gun National Trial Tournament. Top Gun is an innovative, invitation-only trial competition in which the single best advocates from 16 of the top trial advocacy schools go head-to-head for the honor of being designated "Top Gun". The winner receives a $10,000 prize.
Attending this year are Dennis Scanlon L’19 and rising 3L Adam Leydig, who also represented Syracuse at the 2019 National Trial Competition in San Antonio, TX, reaching the Elite Eight and winning the Tiffany Cup. Top Gun will be hosted by Baylor University School of Law in Waco, TX, on June 5-9, 2019. At Top Gun, Scanlon will represent Syracuse as the solo advocate, and Leydig will assist with the trial technology.
"It’s a great honor for Syracuse to be invited to this competition," says trial team coach Joanne VanDyke L'87. VanDyke explains that, unlike other trial competitions, Top Gun participants do not receive the case file until they arrive at Baylor, a mere 24 hours before the first round of trials begin.
She adds that preparation for this exacting mock trial includes reviewing depositions, records, and photographs and taking a trip to the actual places where events in the case supposedly occurred. Shortly before each round, competitors are assigned witnesses who may be used at their discretion during the round. The jurors for each round are distinguished trial lawyers and judges.
Commentary: The Risk of Not Pursuing an Impeachment Inquiry
By Professor David Driesen
(Re-published from Newsday | May 23, 2019) As House Democrats wrestle with the question of whether to begin an impeachment inquiry, they need to consider the danger failing to do so poses to congressional oversight authority.
That was made clear on Wednesday when President Donald Trump declared that he could not work with Democrats as long as Congress continues to exercise its oversight of his administration, calling it “phony investigations.”
In response, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has pushed back against calls for impeachment from members of her Democratic caucus, said Trump is obstructing justice and that his actions amount to an impeachable offense.
That was bracketed by favorable rulings on the release of Trump’s tax returns and his financial records by federal courts this week. But that should not obscure the risks congressional oversight faces from a Supreme Court deeply skeptical of Congress.
An impeachment inquiry most likely would help the House obtain favorable rulings to overcome the administration’s stonewalling, as conservative judges recognize the need to investigate in the impeachment context.
There are signs the House understands that an impeachment inquiry would bolster the case for judicial enforcement of subpoenas. The resolution seeking a contempt citation against Attorney General William Barr for failing to provide the unredacted Robert Mueller report mentions determining “whether to approve articles of impeachment” against Trump and other officials as one of the purposes of the Judiciary Committee investigation now underway ...
New Article by Professor A. Joseph Warburton Examines Mutual Funds' Risky Borrowing Practices
MUTUAL FUND BORROWING POSES RISK TO MILLIONS OF INVESTORS
(Re-published from Whitman Voices | May 21, 2019) A new study forthcoming in the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies provides evidence that mutual funds are borrowing in an attempt to improve their performance. But those attempts are not only falling short, they are creating more risk to investors who count on the funds to bolster their retirement savings.
“Economists often assume that open-end mutual funds do not leverage themselves by borrowing money, however the Investment Company Act of 1940 permits mutual funds to have a capital structure that is up to one-third debt,” said A. Joseph Warburton, professor of finance at Syracuse University’s Martin J. Whitman School of Management and professor of law at Syracuse University’s College of Law. “This paper is the first to study the performance of open-end funds that exploit their statutory borrowing authority.”
Warburton constructed a database using information contained in annual filings of open-end domestic equity mutual funds covering 17 years from 2000 to 2016. He found a surprising number of funds – 18 percent – bulked up at some point by borrowing in an effort to juice performance after lagging in the mutual fund rankings. Ironically, those that borrowed underperformed their non-borrowing peers by 62 basis points per year on a total return basis, incurring greater risk, as well.
“These borrowers are plain-vanilla mutual funds, not the exotic investment vehicles often associated with leverage, such as alternative funds and levered index funds,” said Warburton. “Most people think their 401(k)s are safe, but there is hidden risk in the investment vehicle millions of Americans rely upon for their retirement savings.”
Unlike borrowing, the study found funds that use derivatives and other financial instruments perform about as well as unlevered mutual funds, before and after adjusting for risk, and with less volatility. This suggests that many mutual funds use derivatives to hedge risk rather than as a substitute for leverage through the capital structure.
“Borrowing may present a greater risk than derivatives, which have received more attention than borrowing,” said Warburton. “The average investor is virtually unaware of how much a mutual fund is borrowing and the associated effect on performance,” said Warburton. “The required semi-annual reports have very little detail and it’s not easy to find.”
Warburton maintains that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is too focused on the use of derivatives, overlooking the potential crisis mutual fund borrowing presents. Fund investors and regulators would benefit from collecting further data on mutual fund borrowing to provide greater transparency into mutual fund capital structure.
Pacific Standard Magazine Discusses Journalist Raid with Professor Roy Gutterman
SAN FRANCISCO POLICE RAIDED A FREELANCE JOURNALIST'S HOME. WAS IT LEGAL?
(Pacific Standard | May 13, 2019) On Friday, May 10th, freelance journalist Bryan Carmody awoke to police officers using a sledgehammer on the gate to his home in San Francisco. After Carmody allowed the police inside, they seized a variety of items, including computers, phones, and flash drives from his home and office. Carmody was detained in handcuffs for roughly five hours while police searched his home, KQED reports.
They were searching for the source of a leaked police report that Carmody had sold to three TV news stations, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
The police report concerned the events surrounding the death of San Francisco public defender Jeff Adachi in February at age 59. Adachi was known for being a watchdog of police conduct, the Chronicle reports. Just hours after his death, information from the leaked police report—including that Adachi had died from accidental overdose of cocaine and alcohol—appeared on various news stations.
Two weeks ago, investigators asked Carmody to identify the source that had provided him with the report, but he declined. The raid was "a step in the process of investigating a potential case of obstruction of justice along with the illegal distribution of confidential police material," a spokesman for the San Francisco police told NPR.
To learn more about what made this raid unusual, Pacific Standard spoke to Roy Gutterman, an expert in communications law and First Amendment rights. Gutterman is the director of the Newhouse School's Tully Center for Free Speech, and a member the Freedom of Information Committee for the Society of Professional Journalists and the faculty committee for the Government Accountability Project in Washington, D.C.
If a reporter obtains leaked documents, have they committed a crime?
Reporters get materials and documents they shouldn't have all the time. That's not necessarily a crime—and it shouldn't be considered a crime—unless the reporter played a pivotal role in obtaining the documents illegally, such as breaking into an office or hacking into a computer system. But simply having sources who give you materials you shouldn't have does not and should not constitute a crime.
As far as we know, Carmody didn't obtain those documents illegally. Was it still legal for the cops to search his home and office?
The police got a search warrant—I can't believe a judge approved the search warrant in the first place. The question of the probable cause as to whether the reporter played a role in a leak is a huge step away from what should be permitted under both the First and Fourth Amendment.
Why would a judge approve a warrant in this case? And what is the significance of having a warrant issued instead of a subpoena?
When police show up at a house or a business with a search warrant, everybody that is subject to that search warrant has to comply. There are legitimate law-enforcement reasons for that: the destruction of evidence, the preservation of evidence. However, I don't think a leak investigation is the kind of criminal matter that would warrant an early morning execution of a search warrant. At least you can file a motion to quash and challenge it and attempt to get it thrown out of court [with a subpoena]. There's no such luxury with a search warrant.
Again, [law enforcement is] coming to a freelance reporter's home. They're not going to an organized crime hideout or a drug stash or any place like that. So it just seems extremely heavy-handed. Law enforcement knew what they were doing: They knew that they could just go right in and execute the search warrant without having to worry about a legal challenge on the spot ...
Syracuse University College of Law NTC Team Reaches Elite Eight, Wins Tiffany Cup
3L Dennis Scanlon and 2L Adam Leydig
The National Trial Competition (NTC) is one of the oldest, largest, and most prestigious mock trial competitions in the United States, featuring teams from more than 140 law schools and 1,000 law student competitors. This year's national finals were held in San Antonio, TX, on March 27-31, 2019. Having won its regional round, the College of Law NTC team advanced with 29 other teams to the national finals, where it reached the quarterfinals, making it one of the top eight mock trial teams in the nation.
Furthermore, the team of 3L Dennis Scanlon and 2L Adam Leydig won the prestigious Tiffany Cup. Established in 1974, the Tiffany Cup was created by the Trial Lawyers Section of the New York State Bar Association. It is awarded to the New York State law school whose team has the highest cumulative point total at the NTC.
Thanks to Scanlon and Leydig's win, the cup—created by jewelers Tiffany & Co.—will be on display in Dineen Hall for one year. Additionally, the College of Law collects a check for $7,500 and a plaque listing 2019 NTC Team members and coaches. This year, the NTC team was coached by Joanne Van Dyke L'87, Jeff Leibo L'03, Justin St. Louis L'17, and Professor Emeritus Travis H.D. Lewin.
Commentary: Like the Warmbiers, Former CIA Detainees Deserve Chance to Seek Justice
By David M. Crane
(Re-published from The Hill | May 19, 2019) In the headlines again recently was the tragic case of University of Virginia student Otto Warmbier, when it was disclosed that North Korea billed the United States $2 million for his medical treatment while a captive. Warmbier died in 2017 shortly after arriving home following more than a year in North Korean detention. Arrested by the North Koreans for spying, Warmbier was accused of ripping down a propaganda poster in a restricted area of his hotel in Pyongyang. He likely suffered unimaginable torture during his time in detention, but because of the opaque nature of the North Korean regime, little is known about his treatment and what caused the severe brain injury that led to his coma and death.
The news raised questions about the negotiations for Warmbier’s release and whether the medical bill the U.S. apparently had agreed to pay essentially was a ransom payment. The Trump administration has denied that it ever was paid. Warmbier’s mother, Cynthia, said that if she knew the North Koreans were after money she would have given it to them from day one. It is understandable that the relatives of victims of torture and cruelty by foreign governments are prepared to do anything to see them released and to gain justice for their families.
The Warmbiers received a modicum of justice in a federal court last December, when North Korea was ordered to pay the family over $500 million in damages. At the time of the ruling, his parents commented, “We are thankful that the United States has a fair and open judicial system so that the world can see that the Kim regime is legally and morally responsible for Otto’s death. … We promised Otto that we will never rest until we have justice for him.” The judge in the case noted that the award was substantial to deter the North Koreans from engaging in this type of behavior again.
Although the U.S. courts have offered a legal venue for the Warmbiers to seek judicial redress, under Article 14 of the Convention against Torture (CAT) and international legal standards, they also should have meaningful access to legal proceedings where the torture took place. They have a right to judicial redress, adequate compensation and means for as full a rehabilitation as possible. This is something that the United States and the 163 other signatories to the CAT have committed to and is an important tool for ensuring reconciliation, healing and prevention.
Unfortunately for the Warmbiers and their quest for justice, North Korea is unlikely to pay a damages award or to provide this sort of judicial process for redress and compensation. But imagine if similar torture, cruel treatment and even death happened to a U.S. citizen in a country that had signed the CAT. The United States surely would demand the right of our citizens to have access to judicial redress and the ability to seek adequate compensation for their treatment.
Indeed, if the United States expects other countries to open their courts for U.S. victims overseas, it needs to do that for those who claim torture and ill-treatment by the United States. Specifically, victims of the U.S. post-9/11 Rendition, Detention and Interrogation (RDI) program thus far have been unable to seek meaningful redress in U.S. courts. These individuals were suspected of terrorism, rounded up in Afghanistan on promise of a bounty. After months or years of detention, many were released without charge or explanation ...
David M. Crane is a Syracuse University College of Law Distinguished Scholar in Residence.
Professor Arlene Kanter Calls for CRPD Ratification in Touro Law Review
Kanter, Arlene S. "Let’s Try Again: Why the United States Should Ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities." Touro Law Review, 35 (2019).
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) was adopted by the United Nations in 2006 and entered into force in 2008, explains Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor of Teaching Excellence and Director of the Disability Law and Policy Program Arlene Kanter in Touro Law Review.
Since then, 177 countries have ratified the CRPD, but not the United States. "This is not the first time that the US has failed to ratify a human rights treaty," Kanter writes. "Of the nine core human rights treaties that the UN has adopted, the US has ratified only three. Based on this record, the US is considered to have one of the worst treaty ratification records in the world."
After President Barack Obama signed the CRPD, the US Senate failed to ratify it, "not once but on two occasions." Kanter further explains that the CRPD goes beyond the rights provided in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). "However, that is not a reason not to ratify. In fact, the best reason for the US to ratify the CRPD is that ratification will help to fully realize the promise of the ADA and its 2008 amendments," she continues.
In her article, Kanter argues that the Senate should ratify the CRPD without any further delay. The first section provides an overview of the CRPD, followed by a discussion of the ways in which the Convention differs from the ADA of 1990, as well as the ADA Amendments Act of 2008. The third section discusses the process that led to the failure of the Senate to ratify the CRPD, including responses to the arguments against ratification presented by a group of “Tea Party” Republican senators.
Kanter's article concludes with an immediate call for the Senate to ratify the CRPD in order to fulfill its duty to Americans with disabilities. However, "given the current composition of the Senate and the isolationist policies of the Trump Administration," Kanter concedes that despite the many benefits of CRPD ratification, it is unlikely to occur any time soon.
Jacobson Joins Bond, Schoeneck & King
Nicholas Jacobson joins Bond, Schoeneck & King as an associate in the firm's Labor and Employment Department.
Wentsler Named a Best Lawyers "Lawyer of the Year"
Stephen Wentsler, managing member at Wentsler LLC, was named a 2019 Patent Law "Lawyer of the Year" in Cleveland, Ohio, by Best Lawyers.
Hubbard Named in 40 Under 40
Tyson Hubbard, partner at Downey Brand, was named a 2018 40 Under 40 Honoree by Sacramento Business Journal.
Imhof Jr. Joins Vedder Price
John Imhof Jr. has joined Vedder Price as Global Transportation Finance Shareholder.
Murphy Named in Best Lawyers in America
Timothy Murphy, managing partner at Hancock Estabrook, was named in the 2019 Best Lawyers in America.
Shaw Named in Best Lawyers in America
Steven Shaw, leader of the Real Estate Practice Area at Hancock Estabrook, was named in the 2019 Best Lawyers in America.
Pierce Named in Best Lawyers in America
Alan Pierce, partner and leader of the Appellate Practice at Hancock Estabrook, was named in the 2019 Best Lawyers in America.
Meagher Named in Best Lawyers in America
Walter Meagher, partner at Hancock Estabrook, was named in the 2019 Best Lawyers in America.
D'Agostino Named in Best Lawyers in America
Raymond D'Agostino, partner at Hancock Estabrook, was named in the 2019 Best Lawyers in America.
Corcoran Named in Best Lawyers in America
John Corcoran, chair of the Labor & Employment Department and leader of the Education and Municipal Practices at Hancock Estabrook, was selected for inclusion in the 2019 Best Lawyers in America.
Cook Named in Best Lawyers in America
Rick Cook, partner and leader of the Banking & Finance Practice at Hancock Estabrook, was named in the 2019 Best Lawyers in America.
Gold Named Senior Director of Corporate Accounts at Catalyst
Daniel Gold was named Senior Director of Corporate Accounts at Catalyst.
Gusmano Joins Barclay Damon's Trust & Estate Practice Area
Kelly Gusmano, associate at Barclay Damon, joins the firm's Trust & Estate Practice Area.
Coppola Named Chair of the National Association of Women Business Owner's Presidents Assembly Steering Committee
Lisa Coppola, founder and managing partner of the Coppola Firm, was named Chair of the National Association of Women Business Owner's Presidents Assembly Steering Committee.
Paull Goldberg Joins the Coppola Firm
Melissa Paull Goldberg joined the Coppola Firm as Of Counsel.
Commentary: Aiming for Trump's Achilles' Heel
By David Cay Johnston
(Re-published from Newsday | May 15, 2019) Throughout his adult life, Donald Trump has escaped the consequences of his actions. Trump has run out the clock on several grand juries. Trials and audits showed he hid records. He has lied under oath, ratted out others, required associates to sign lifetime secrecy agreements and shielded his finances thanks to the secrecy and complexity of tax law.
Trump seems vulnerable to attack, like Achilles, the mythical Greek warrior whose mother Thetis dipped him in the river Styx so he would be invulnerable. But Trump has an Achilles’ heel. A political arrow that strikes at Trump’s one vulnerable spot is flowing faster than the river Styx toward Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s desk.
Candidate Trump promised to make his tax returns public, but then reneged, claiming he is under audit. That made no sense because once you sign your tax return declaring it “true, accurate and complete,” disclosing the return only allows voters to see what you did.
Trump also will not produce an audit letter, an anodyne document that reveals nothing except the type of tax return and year or years under audit.
Now Trump is trying to block the chief tax writer in Congress from confidentially obtaining the last six years of his tax returns under a 1924 anticorruption law. It requires that any returns “shall be furnished upon written request.” The president has the same power, and both the White House and Congress exercise this law routinely.
Trump ordered Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin to break the law, Section 6103 of the tax code, the first violation in the 95 years since enactment.
Mnuchin’s involvement suggests that Charles Rettig, the Beverly Hills tax lawyer who Trump named IRS commissioner, refused Trump’s order. That would have put Rettig’s California law license at risk, potentially ending his lucrative career.
In addition to forcing House Democrats to seek court orders to enforce the law, Trump sued his banks and accountants, hoping to block them from turning over financial and tax records ...
David Cay Johnston is a Distinguished Visiting Lecturer at Syracuse University College of Law.
Professor Shubha Ghosh Publishes on "Jurisdiction Stripping" & Commercial Law in Akron Law Review
Ghosh, Shubha. "Jurisdiction Stripping of the Federal Circuit?" Akron Law Review, 52:2 (2019).
"This article examines how the Federal Circuit addresses state commercial and contract law in its patent law jurisprudence," writes Crandall Melvin Professor of Law and Director of the Syracuse Intellectual Property Law Institute Shubha Ghosh in the abstract to "Jurisdiction Stripping of the Federal Circuit?" in Akron Law Review, 52:2.
Instead of deferring to state law, Ghosh asserts, the federal circuit court creates its own "federal common law of contracts and assignments," creating parallels with the debates arising from the 1938 Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins decision ("Since federal common law is invalid, federal courts sitting in diversity jurisdiction should apply substantive state law and federal procedural law, unless there is a conflict between substantive state and federal law.")
This federal common law is inconsistent with the need for uniformity in the law governing patent transactions, says Ghosh, adding that, to resolve this issue, "Congress may consider stripping Federal Circuit jurisdiction over state contract law claims." Ghosh's article further examines the pros and cons of this proposal.
Professor David Driesen Discusses "Rethinking Impeachment" with Politico
Here’s Why Democrats May Rethink Impeaching Trump
(Politico | May 10, 2019) Democrats know that impeachment is a losing proposition against President Donald Trump right now.
But there’s another rationale for launching impeachment that has some Democrats reconsidering the idea — getting access to the sensitive documents and testimony that Trump’s team is withholding.
Judges have repeatedly ruled that Congress has a greater claim to sensitive government documents and personal information when it can point to an ongoing legal matter, instead of just a congressional investigation or legislative debate. And impeachment would give lawmakers that legal matter — the process is essentially a court procedure run by Congress where the House brings charges and the Senate holds the trial.
The idea might seem toxic to House Democratic leaders who have so far resisted impeachment overtures against the president, aware that the politically explosive move wouldn’t get through the Republican-led Senate and could turn off voters ahead of the 2020 election.
But legal experts and lawmakers across the ideological spectrum acknowledge that formally unleashing impeachment would bolster Democrats’ arguments that they deserve to see the president’s tax returns, interview senior officials, peruse special counsel Robert Mueller’s trove of evidence and see the details of Trump’s personal dealings with foreign leaders. So far, the Trump administration has vociferously argued it doesn’t need to acquiesce to such demands, which it says are merely part of a political hit job. The president’s personal attorneys have even punched back with lawsuits in some cases ...
... Absent opening up impeachment proceedings, Syracuse University law professor David Driesen said he thinks the Trump administration has the upper hand in its court fights over the ignored subpoenas and requests. The current argument that the information is needed to help Congress craft legislation just won’t cut it, he said.
“I think the courts — especially conservative judges — are more likely to give weight to an impeachment inquiry than the claim that this is somehow relevant to legislation,” he said ...
Commentary: Between Hacks and Hostilities—Are the US Government and Private Sector Ready for Persistent Engagement?
By the Hon. James E. Baker
(Re-published from ABA Journal | May 9, 2019) Cybersecurity is necessarily an issue that crosses international boundaries, raising complex questions of sovereignty, jurisdiction, law and policy. In response, lawyers have struggled to find the right legal metaphor or framework to apply to cyberspace. Each of these issues concerns the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative because the way we as a society choose to address these challenges implicates what it means to live and operate under the rule of law.
The United States government produces almost as many reports and strategies as the ABA. One recent document warrants the attention of the bar, and not just security practitioners. The Department of Defense Cyber Strategy released in September—or more precisely, the unclassified part of the Strategy available to the public—breaks new and important ground, potentially marking a significant shift in the federal government’s strategic posture. How important the Strategy is will depend in large part on whether it is tied to an effective policy and decision-making process.
If I were briefing a senior policymaker on the substance and import of this new Strategy, I would highlight the following key statement:
“We are engaged in a long-term strategic competition with China and Russia. … The United States seeks to use all instruments of national power to deter adversaries from conducting malicious cyberspace activity that would threaten U.S. national interests, our allies, or our partners. … [The United States will] persistently contest malicious cyber activity in day-to-day competition.”
What is remarkable here is not the content of the statement, but the willingness to say it publicly. What would be even more remarkable would be if the U.S. government did in fact use all the instruments of national power to enforce cyber norms, as it once used all the instruments of national power to contain the Soviet Union. Gen. Paul Nakasone, in his capacity as the commander of U.S. Cyber Command, has advocated this approach encapsulated in the concept of “persistent engagement" ...
Trial Practice Class Continues Collaboration with Cayuga County Sheriff's Department
Cayuga County Deputy testifies in Lee Michaels' trial class
The third annual collaboration between Adjunct Professor Lee Michaels’ L'67 trial practice section and the Cayuga County Sheriff’s Department continued a welcome trend of law enforcement participation in the College of Law's Advocacy Program. In Spring 2019, four final trials for the students took place, each with a member of the Sheriff’s Department as a live participant, acting as a guest witness. Two detectives, a road deputy, and Sheriff Brian Schenck acted as prosecution witnesses in four separate practice criminal trials.
In addition to the guest witnesses, the trials included four guest judges, including David Thurston L'04, a former student of Michaels, and Joanne VanDyke L'87, longtime coach and mentor of the College’s intercollegiate trial teams.
Michaels’ classes have concluded with final practice trials for nearly three decades. When necessary, extra class sessions are scheduled in order to permit qualified students to compete alone in a mock trial that typically takes over three hours to complete. This year, four students participated alone. Michaels admits that he is a demanding professor. “I expect excellence by the end of the semester from every student,” he says. “From the very first class until students have completed their final trial, they are constantly under pressure to improve their skill level every week, performing and competing in increasingly challenging exercises. The pressure is not off until they finish their final trial and can take a deep breath. I do not allow students to stay down on themselves.”
Sheriff Schenck noted his department’s excitement when asked to partner with the College again as students put what they have learned to the test in a court room setting. The collaboration is a mutually beneficial. During the practice trials, officers have the opportunity to hone their own testimony skills while the students are able to examine live witnesses. “This is a great partnership that is very beneficial to all of us,” agrees Schenck. After each of the Sheriff’s Department witness completes his or her testimony, the trial is stopped while Michaels critiques the witness for a few minutes. “That’s my very easy end of the bargain with the Sheriff,” says Michaels.
William C. Banks Discusses Trump, Barr, & Executive Privilege with Bloomberg Law
William C. Banks discusses the clash between House Democrats and Attorney General William Barr over a subpoena for the unredacted version of the Mueller report and Trump’s decision to assert executive privilege. He speaks with Bloomberg’s June Grasso.
Samantha Kasmarek Moderates NALP Public Sector Careers Panel
Samantha Kasmarek and panel members at NALP 2019 in Sand Diego, CA.
Samantha Kasmarek, Associate Director in the College of Law's Office of Career Services, recently moderated a panel discussion at the National Association for Law Placement (NALP) Annual Education Conference in San Diego, CA, April 9-12, 2019.
The program—"Public Sector Interviewing with Confidence"—featured members of hiring committees for the New York City Law Department, the New York County (Manhattan) District Attorney’s Office, and the Legal Aid Society of San Diego.
"The engaging discussion addressed difficult interviewing questions faced by graduating students for entry-level public interest jobs," says Kasmarek. "Panelists shared the qualities they look for in candidates and how schools can best prepare their students and graduates for the interview process."
Panelists were Lillian Evans, Deputy Director of Legal Recruitment and Deputy EEO Officer, NYC Law Department; Audrey Moore, Executive Assistant District Attorney, Chief Diversity Officer, and Chief of the Special Victims Bureau, New York County District Attorney’s Office; and Daniel Benson, Managing Attorney, Legal Aid Society of San Diego.
"We spoke before audience members from law schools and other legal employers, so it was lively discussion!" notes Kasmarek.
Peter Blanck Joins Policy & Governance Panel at Autonomous Systems Policy Symposium
BBI Chairman Peter Blanck speaks at "Autonomous Systems and their Policy, Law, and Governance Implications".
Peter Blanck, University Professor and Chairman of the Burton Blatt Institute, joined colleagues from across Syracuse University at "Autonomous Systems and their Policy, Law, and Governance Implications," a one-day symposium that took place on May 6, 2019, in the Goldstein Auditorium. The Symposium—along with Blanck's panel on Policy and Governance of Autonomous Systems—is part of a new, cross-campus initiative by the University to explore technology, policy, legal, and wider social implications of autonomous systems.
From self-driving cars to drone delivery systems and from robotic underwater vessels to smart-home technologies, autonomous systems are transforming the world, posing complex social, ethical, and legal questions that demand multi-faceted research. At the Symposium, University Chancellor Kent Syverud announced the establishment of a new interdisciplinary Institute at the University that will examining myriad issues surrounding the increasing reliance on autonomous systems.
Joining Blank on the Policy and Governance panel were Jamie Boone, Vice President of Government Affairs, Consumer Technology Association; Tina Nabatchi, Joseph A. Strasser Endowed Professor in Public Administration; and Austin Zwick, Assistant Teaching Professor, Maxwell School. The panel was moderated by Maxwell School Dean David van Slyke.
The Autonomous Systems Policy Institute will be led by Professor Jamie Winders of the Maxwell School. The Institute will draw on the expertise of all of the University’s schools and colleges and provide opportunities for faculty and students to immerse in cutting-edge research and experiential learning in this rapidly evolving field.
Law Review Symposium Addresses Impacts of Online Education on Law Schools & the Legal Profession
On April 26, 2019, Syracuse University College of Law and Syracuse Law Review hosted a first-of-its-kind law review symposium on online education and its impact on law schools and the legal profession. “Online Learning and the Future of Legal Education” convened a diverse group of leading thinkers—including a number of current and former law school deans—to discuss best practices in online learning, to share and evaluate different learning models, and to explore the implications for the legal profession and access to justice more broadly.
Introduced by Associate Dean of Online Education Nina Kohn and Syracuse Law Review Editor-in-Chief 3L Shelby Mann, the symposium opened with presentations on best practices in online law teaching, moderated by College of Law E.I. White Chair and Distinguished Professor of Law Robin Paul Malloy. University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law Dean Michael Hunter Schwartz explained how law teaching excellence is not “modality dependent” and suggested that the most effective form of law teaching would likely include both residential and online components. Texas A&M Clinical Associate Professor Noelle Sweany then shared best practices for designing and developing engaging online courses.
Subsequent morning presentations focused on the impact of online education on the legal profession and those it serves. In the session moderated by College of Law Executive Director of Online Education Kathleen O’Connor, Touro Law Center Professor Jack Graves spoke about "hybrid models" for legal education, while Professor David Thomson, of the University of Denver Strum School of Law, looked toward the future of legal education. In his talk, Eric S. Janus, former President and Dean of William Mitchell College of Law, described how attitudes toward hybrid legal education are indeed shifting.
A lunchtime conversation between College of Law Dean Craig M. Boise and online legal education pioneer Barry Currier, Managing Director of Accreditation and Legal Education at the American Bar Association, saw Currier raise the issue of whether law schools are currently underutilizing online learning and ask, rhetorically, how long it would be before the ABA approves a fully online law degree program.
College of Law Associate Dean for Faculty Research Lauryn Gouldin moderated the afternoon session. Texas A&M’s Professor James McGrath and Dean Andrew Morriss explored how online legal education could help close the “justice gap” by training lawyers to practice where they are needed. Professor Victoria Sutton, of Texas Tech University School of Law, then compared two online learning models—asynchronous and hybrid e-learning—with the traditional classroom. Rounding out the presentations, Kellye Testy, President & CEO of the Legal School Admission Council, shared data on how the move toward online education aligns with other trends in legal education and law school enrollment.
“What I learned at the Symposium validates my belief that we have arrived at a critical and exciting inflection point in the delivery of legal education,” noted Dean Boise, thanking the participants. “Improvements in online pedagogy and delivery give us—indeed, force us—to rethink how we do legal education and what it means to ‘do it right’! I couldn’t have asked for a better group to examine the challenges and ample opportunities that lay ahead.”
It is no coincidence that the College of Law—which enrolled the first cohort into JDinteractive, its live, online law degree program, in January 2019—hosted this ground-breaking symposium.
“Online education—and its impact on legal education, the legal profession, and those it serves—is an issue that Syracuse scholars and educators care deeply about,” explains Associate Dean of Online Education and David M. Levy Professor of Law Nina Kohn. “Our faculty and staff have worked diligently and carefully to develop an online law degree program that we believe can expand access to legal education to talented students and be a model for other schools seeking to move into this space.”
To continue the Symposium’s inquiries and scholarship, “Online Learning and the Future of Legal Education” will result in a Syracuse Law Review issue devoted entirely to exploring questions raised about online education.
"The Hybrid Model for Legal Education: Better Teachers, Greater Access, and Better Future Lawyers"
Jack Graves, Professor of Law and Director of Digital Legal Education, Touro Law Center
"The 'Worst Idea Ever!'—Lessons from One Law School’s Pioneering Embrace of Online Learning Methods"
Eric S. Janus, former President and Dean, Mitchell Hamline School of Law (formerly William Mitchell College of Law)
"Online Legal Education and Access to Legal Education and the Legal System"
James McGrath, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Academic Support, Bar Passage, and Compliance, Texas A&M School of Law
Andrew P. Morriss, Dean, School of Innovation and Vice President of Entrepreneurship and Economic Development, Texas A&M University
"Pernicious Legal Education Myths: Towards a Modality-Less Model for Excellence"
Michael Hunter Schwartz, Dean and Professor of Law, University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law
“A Comparative Study with the Traditional Classroom”
Victoria Sutton, Paul Whitfield Horn Professor and Associate Dean for Digital Learning and Graduate Education, Texas Tech University School of Law
"From Theory to Practice: Evidence-Based Strategies for Designing and Developing Engaging Online Courses"
Noelle Sweany, Clinical Associate Professor, Educational Psychology, Texas A & M University Department of Education and Human Development
"The Promise of Online Educational Platforms for Law and Legal Education"
Kellye Testy, President and CEO, Law School Admission Council and Professor of Law, University of Washington School of Law
"How Online Learning Will Transform Legal Education"
David Thomson, Professor of Practice and John C. Dwan Professor for Online Learning, University of Denver Strum School of Law
Commentary: Competition Through the Pervasive Method
(Re-published from Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog | May 3, 2019) Antitrust law is hot again, but what will be its flavor? Bork’s antitrust paradox has just created new dilemmas. Lower prices, as made possible by platforms like Amazon, may not live up to the promise of maximizing of consumer welfare. And consumer welfare may not be the right metric for antitrust success anyway. Over the forty years since the publication of The Antitrust Paradox in 1978 United States markets have become more concentrated, less competitive, and less innovative despite the veil of new gadgets, lowered transaction costs for consumers, and imagined increases in consumer surplus.
Professor Jonathan Baker’s new book, “The Antitrust Paradigm: Restoring a Competitive Economy,” calls for a revitalization of antitrust by making it truer to its economic goals of promoting allocative efficiency and aggregate welfare. There is no new paradigm being offered, but a return to fundamentals with a reboot incorporating new economic models from industrial organization, new thinking by existing antitrust agencies, and a new commitment to reducing concentration. Starting with a diagnosis of “market paroxysms,” which shows how Chicago-style economics of the 1970’s (the one informing Bork) has guided judges and agencies to permit increased concentration with the resulting threats to innovation and to economic welfare, all justified by the pursuit of economic efficiency. Bork’s solution to his perceived antitrust paradox has created a paradox of its own: an antitrust law that fails to promote competition by extolling a competitive economy that leads to bigness. Peter Thiel best exemplifies this contradiction in his “Zero to One,” where he suggests that business success is measured by being number one, including being a monopolist in one’s industry.
An indication of the timeliness of Professor Baker’s book is its synchronicity with the release of a new report from the International Monetary Fund on April 3, which concluded, according to The Economist: “[M]arket power has risen notably in America and by a smaller amount in Europe and largely affected industries outside manufacturing.” Although the Fund acknowledges that this increased concentration may be the result of organic growth in winner take all markets, The Economist points out, “market power that grows organically is still market power.” The Fund’s report identifies the pernicious effects of this concentration: less investment in physical capital, a smaller share of the economic value created going to workers, and potentially putting a brake on future innovation, despite evidence of increased patenting today.
Against this background, Baker proposes a revitalized approach to antitrust that combats concentration. Two reform proposals can strengthen antitrust enforcement, he argues. First is a more judicious use of presumptions by antitrust agencies and courts. Evidence of firm concentration will trigger a presumption of anticompetitiveness which the firm must rebut. Second, this presumption would be imposed based on a sliding scale with firms having less market share receiving a presumption of competitiveness. As I understand them, the twin proposals can shift the current lackadaisical attitude that has permitted the levels of concentration reported by the IMF and justified on efficiency grounds. Professor Baker does not engage with defenses of synergies which have often allowed high tech mergers, such as the ones between AOL and Time-Warner decades ago and the recent Time-Warner merger with Comcast. But the use of a sliding scale would require strong evidence to rebut the presumption of harm to competition in concentrated industries, making it more difficult to justify mergers on predicted technological or economic synergies.
Professor Baker addresses the issue of competition and innovation in Chapter Eight, and I will focus on this chapter for the rest of this post. Two big ideas come out in his discussion of innovation. First is a rethinking of the Horizontal Merger Guidelines as framed by Baker’s reform proposals. Second is increased antitrust scrutiny of patents, especially in the context of standard setting.
Baker’s reassessment of the Horizontal Merger Guidelines is a welcome analysis of an area of antitrust law that has seemed toothless and unpredictable. Part of the problem is that merger analysis gets lots is a trove of necessary, but often impenetrable, technical data that guide the decisions of antitrust agencies. Large mergers that seem to have strong anticompetitive potential pass muster while seemingly less problematic mergers fail. As discussed above, the mysterious appeal to synergies often mask more immediate and negative consequences. Baker’s proposals, if taken seriously, could jump start the field and counter trends towards concentration ...
Commentary: Mueller Report Offers Ample Basis for Impeachment Inquiry
By David Driesen
(Re-published from Law360 | May 3, 2019) Special counsel Robert Mueller's recently released report paints a disturbing picture of President Donald Trump and his aides welcoming Russian interference in the 2016 election. This vivid picture, while damning enough on its own, lacks some pieces. Portions of the report addressing Trump’s relationship with the Russian election interference have suffered heavy redaction, and key witnesses destroyed potential evidence.
Even so, the decision not to prosecute Trump or his associates for accepting Russian help reflects a close call in at least one instance. In many more cases, the welcoming of Russian interference, while probably not criminal, clearly is wrong and raises serious questions about U.S. national security while Trump remains in office. Opening up an impeachment investigation is the prudent and necessary next step by House Democrats, given what we have learned thus far.
The close call involves Donald Trump, Jr., who received an offer from a Russian attorney for allegedly incriminating documents about Hillary Clinton on June 3, 2016. He did not report this apparent Russian government effort to influence the American election to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Nor did he ignore the offer.
Instead, he encouraged the Russians to continue their efforts and to make it more effective, stating, “I love it especially late in summer.” And he arranged for subsequent meetings, suggesting a desire to obtain the derogatory documents.
The Mueller report explains in detail why the special counsel decided not to charge Trump, Jr., with campaign finance violations for accepting valuable information from the Russians, but the reasons are very technical and quite debatable.
The report also explains that on July 27, 2016, candidate Trump publicly stated that he hoped that Russia would “find the 30,000 [Hillary Clinton] emails that are missing.” Thus, Trump invited the Russians to interfere in our election, which they clearly did. The report does not explain why this conduct alone does not constitute conspiracy or treason, but it suggests collusion.
The report documents that the Russian GRU intelligence service stole documents from Democratic party servers and gave them to WikiLeaks. Furthermore, Trump knew about the WikiLeaks publication of stolen documents before they occurred, since “Trump told Gates that more releases of damaging information would be coming.” Equally troubling, the report explains that Trump’s campaign aides greeted this news of publication of the fruits of Russian espionage with “enthusiasm" ...
DCEx Students Visit Pentagon as Guest of Joseph Rutigliano L’86
Alumnus Joseph Rutigliano L’86 is Branch Head for the International and Operational Law Branch, Judge Advocate Division, US Marine Corps and Special Assistant on Law of War issues. On April 25, 2019, he was Distinguished Guest Lecturer for the Spring 2019 DC Externship Program’s final seminar, hosted by Rutigliano at the Pentagon.
Before the lecture, participants enjoyed a private tour of the Pentagon from Rutigliano and CPT Stephanie Iacobucci, a US Marine Corps JAG officer currently detailed as a staff attorney within the Operational Law Branch’s office. The participants visited the Pentagon’s 9/11 Memorial exhibits, 9/11 Memorial Chapel, and the Marine Corps Commandants Corridor.
Rutigliano’s presentation was held in the General H.M. Smith Conference Room, where commandants of the Marine Corps hold operational briefings. Rutigliano discussed his experience as a JAG officer and described his path to a career in the Pentagon. He also spoke about his office’s role in providing legal advice to the Department of Defense, which includes emerging areas of military and operational law such as the use of lethal autonomous weapon systems, Marine Corps support at the southern US border, and the protection of certain facilities and assets from unmanned aircrafts. Iacobucci also spoke on her experience as a public defender and her current responsibilities as a US Marine Corps Judge Advocate.
3L Molly D'Agostino Wins First Place in the New York Business Plan Competition's Tech and Entertainment Section
Third-year law student Molly D'Agostino won first place and a $10,000 prize in the Technology and Entertainment Section of the New York Business Plan Competition (NYBPC), the finals of which took place in Albany, NY, on April 26, 2019. D'Agostino's business—Our Song Co.—writes custom songs and offers media services for couples and weddings, including consulting, video, poetry and memoir writing, and more.
Speaking to how her legal studies have contributed to her business venture, D’Agostino says, “The most valuable thing law school has contributed to my business is my experience with the College of Law’s Innovation Law Center (ILC). I knew I had a unique idea, and I wanted to learn how to protect it. What I discovered through ILC helped me craft my strategy.”
D'Agostino was one of several Syracuse University students and student teams that competed in the 10th annual NYBPC, organized by the Upstate Capital Association of New York. Five teams, including D'Agostino, returned to Syracuse with awards for their ideas. The NYBPC regional qualifier was organized by the Syracuse University Libraries’ Blackstone LaunchPad, whose staff also accompanied the teams to Albany. Molly Zimmermann, Associate Director of the New York State Science & Technology Law Center—which is housed in ILC—also accompanied the Syracuse teams.
Since 2010, more than 2,500 students have participated in NYBPC, more than 100 businesses have been started, and the competition has seeded more than $1M, yielding more than $20M in additional funding for these companies.
College of Law Names Advocacy Honor Society After Professor Emeritus Travis H.D. Lewin
Travis H.D. Lewin
Syracuse University College of Law has named its student-run advocacy competition organization the Travis H.D. Lewin Advocacy Honor Society. In doing so, the College honors the faculty member who was instrumental in creating what was, in the early 1970s, a ground-breaking program and who oversaw years of high-profile Moot Court competition successes.
College of Law Dean Craig M. Boise announced the new name at the Advocacy Honor Society’s annual banquet on April 26, 2019. Professor Emeritus Lewin attended the banquet, along with members of his family, faculty, colleagues, and students and alumni, including many who volunteer as coaches and judges for the Advocacy Honor Society’s inter- and intra-school advocacy competitions.
"Professor Emeritus Lewin has made a profound impact on the history of our College and on the lives and careers of our students, especially in courtrooms nationwide. For decades, he advised, coached, and mentored Moot Court competition teams and won national championships against top law schools," says Dean Boise. "Even in retirement, Travis continues to judge competitions and to follow our student competitors avidly. His legacy has fueled the growth and prestige of the Advocacy Honor Society, which now encompasses appellate, dispute resolution, and trial courses and competitions, and serves as a powerful recruitment tool to attract star advocates to our College. Naming the Advocacy Honor Society for Travis will ensure that future generations of advocates are aware of its roots and of the innovation it represented when it was created."
Today, the College of Law is known nationwide for its advocacy skills training and for success at the regional and national levels of major competitions. It has been honored 10 times as New York’s best trial skills law school by the New York State Bar Association.
The Travis H.D. Lewin Advocacy Honor Society oversees mock appellate, alternative dispute resolution, and trial experiences; organizes five intra-school competitions; and sends students to 17 inter-collegiate competitions. Over the years, Syracuse students have won numerous national and regional awards, and during 2017-2018, 196 students took part in the Program.
The College of Law’s Advocacy Program complements the Honor Society by supporting students' practical and trial experiences through teaching essential skills that they will need as practicing lawyers. The curriculum includes the popular introductory and advanced trial practice courses in which lawyers, judges, and faculty teach trial procedures, strategies, and techniques, such as jury selection, expert witness examination, direct and cross-examination, and summation. Simulated trials and competitions take place in Dineen Hall's two state-of-the-art courtrooms.
Before joining the College of Law faculty in 1967, Lewin was in private practice and served as an Assistant US Attorney. A pioneering educator, Lewin's mark on the College extends beyond the Advocacy Program. He was instrumental in establishing the Clinic Program in 1968; he served on numerous University, Chancellor, and University Senate committees and task forces; and he served as Interim Dean of the College from 1987-1988.
Lewin is the distinguished recipient of many awards in the field of advocacy training, including a 1990 Emil Gumpert Excellence in Trial Advocacy Award from the American College of Trial Lawyers; a 2018 Syracuse Law Honors Award from the Syracuse University Law Alumni Association; and a University Chancellor’s Citation for Academic Excellence. Stetson University College of Law has recognized Lewin's work with its prestigious Lifetime Achievement Award for Excellence in Teaching Advocacy.
Retiring from the classroom in 2012, Lewin remains an active figure at the College, and he continues to support the Advocacy Honor Society, notably in the establishment of two scholarships for student advocates. The first scholarship honors his friend and teaching colleague Emil Rossi L’72. The second—the “Models of Excellence in Advocacy" scholarship—is given to a student who "exemplifies leadership, sportsmanship, and professionalism,” and is conferred in honor of an alum of the program.
College of Law Students Present Current Issues in Zoning to Regional Planning and Zoning Officials
2L John Dowling, 3L Maria Zumpano, Professor Malloy, 2L Zach Sonallah, and 3L Chris Baiamonte
In partnership with the town of DeWitt, NY, the College sponsored a four-hour continuing zoning education program in April 2019 for planning and zoning officials from Onondaga and Madison counties. Professor Robin Paul Malloy delivered the program along with four of his Advanced Zoning Law students: 3Ls Chris Baiamonte and Maria Zumpano, and 2Ls John Dowling and Zach Sonallah.
Sixty people were in attendance to learn about current issues in zoning related to Article 78 appeals, accessory uses, non-conforming uses, issues related to the legalization of marijuana, and land use law and disability. Two College of Law alumni attended the program: DeWitt Zoning Board Attorney Donald Doerr L’88 and attorney and real estate developer Marc Malfitano L’78.
After the presentations, attendees provided positive feedback on the content and students, including:
- “Plenty of ideas that will be useful at our local level. Time to review some of our previous decisions."
- “Exceptional in content and relevance, Bravo!!!”
- “Great presentations ... they helped me greatly.”
- “Excellent program and a great credit to the Syracuse University College of Law.“
- “Excellent 'on-point' in-service training; presenters were well prepared and their knowledge on their subjects reflected their research and documentation. Great job by ALL!”
College of Law Invites Participants for the Inaugural Syracuse National Trial Competition
Syracuse University College of Law has invited applications from other law schools nationwide to compete in the Syracuse National Trial Competition (SNTC), a new invitational advocacy competition that will take place in Syracuse city courtrooms and at the College of Law, Oct. 10-12, 2019.
According to Director of Advocacy Programs Professor Todd Berger, 12 law school teams will be selected to compete from those that apply. Team selection will be based on the quality of a school's advocacy program and on wide geographic diversity.
“We look forward to presenting a robust and exciting competition with talented student advocates sharpening their skills in a realistic courtroom setting,” says Berger. “Each team will be guaranteed four rounds of competition before the semi-final and final rounds, which will take place in Dineen Hall. The fact pattern likely will be based on a civil case. In addition to the team competition, awards will be given for individual student performances.”
"The College of Law has a stellar reputation for the quality and scope of its advocacy program and for its successes at the regional and national levels of major competitions," says Dean Craig M. Boise. "The visibility the College will garner from hosting a new national trial invitational, and the level of competition we expect will take place, present a significant opportunity for our students and for the College as a whole."
Honored 10 times as New York’s best trial skills law school by the New York State Bar Association, the College of Law's Travis H.D. Lewin Advocacy Program teaches essential skills that student advocates will require as practicing lawyers, including trial procedures, strategies, and techniques. As part of the curriculum, simulated trials and competitions take place in Dineen Hall's state-of-the-art courtrooms.
Supporting the advocacy curriculum, the College's Advocacy Honors Society (AHS) promotes the development of critical written and oral advocacy skills through competition opportunities. AHS hosts four intra-collegiate advocacy competitions and sponsors College of Law teams that participate in 17 nationwide inter-collegiate competitions.
WAER Explores "Inclusive Capitalism" with Robert Ashford
(WAER | April 15, 2019) If you hear the words “inclusive capitalism,” what would you think it means?
To some Central New Yorkers, it might sound like a system that allows more people access to the economy, perhaps alleviating poverty. At the same time, others might feel it’s another term for socialism.
A Syracuse University law professor says his idea actually doesn’t fit neatly into the typical economic or political spectrums. WAER's Scott Willis digs a little deeper to find out how it might work.
If you ask Professor Robert Ashford, this is how he sees inclusive capitalism.
Ashford says his theory falls somewhere in between because many politicians these days are either solidly for austerity or stimulus.
In a nutshell, Ashford says his principle goes something like this: The more broadly a business acquires capital and distributes it with the earnings of capital—which is to say labor, land, buildings, and machines—the fuller employment we will have.
That’s Jenny Trinh, senior manager of thought leadership at the coalition for inclusive capitalism. The not-for-profit works with companies to promote innovative business solutions so economic benefits are widely shared with the many, not just a few.
Trinh says there’s been a lot of interest, though definitions and perceptions of inclusive capitalism clearly vary.
Some might call it conscious or responsible capitalism. She says we’re seeing some of that now, through offering better maternity and paternity leave, supporting worker college tuition payments, or paying for skills recertification to name a few. But Trinh says the larger impact goes beyond benefits and wages.
Professor Robert Ashford says people are getting poorer because they don’t have that access to capital acquisition without the earnings of capital, they’re left out of that equation.
He acknowledges the concept of inclusive capitalism is not widely understood, though a growing number of economists are beginning to accept it. Ashford says those who might be skeptical have to understand that another system might work.
William C. Banks Publishes Seventh Edition of Constitutional Law
Constitutional Law: Structure and Rights in Our Federal System (7th Edition)
Eds. William C. Banks & Rodney A. Smolla
Carolina Academic Press, 2019
"Twenty-five years ago we set out to create a constitutional law casebook that teaches well," write Professor Emeritus William C. Banks and Dean Rodney Smolla of Widener University Delaware Law School in the Preface to the seventh edition of Constitutional Law: Structure and Rights in Our Federal System (Carolina Academic Press, 2019). "We wanted to teach from a book that would engage students in learning basic constitutional law and would enable teachers to work with cases and problems relatively unencumbered by extensive secondary source materials and treatise-like notes.
"In preparing the seventh edition of our casebook, we have continued to develop the characteristics that distinguish our book from others. First, we continue to place heavy emphasis on the structure of government, the constitutional concepts of federalism, and separation of powers."
Traditional in scope, with full coverage of separation of powers, federalism, and individual rights, Constitutional Law emphasizes structural issues more so than many other constitutional law casebooks. Individual rights are discussed in context and within chapters focusing on traditional doctrinal categories, such as economic and social rights, rights of conscience and expression, and rights in the public arena.
The seventh edition makes heavy use of contemporary constitutional conflicts to present in a vivid manner the cases and secondary material traditionally covered in comprehensive constitutional law courses, including case studies in issues such as gun control, problems on the special counsel investigation by Robert Mueller, the Supreme Court's resolution of which branch controls recognition of Jerusalem in providing passports, and controversies surrounding the Affordable Care Act.
This edition also expands dramatically the coverage of the religion and speech clauses, so that the casebook is useable for comprehensive courses on the First Amendment at law schools that break out coverage of constitutional law into a basic course and a follow-up course on civil liberties or the First Amendment.
- The Origins: “We the People”: Where Does Power Reside in Our Constitutional System?
- Separation of Powers: Constitutional Checks and Balances
- Federalism Limits on Federal Courts
- Federalism Limits on the Elected Branches and on the States
- Public and Private Domain
- Exclusion and Equal Protection
- Economic and Social Rights
- Freedom of Speech and Association
Sanford Heisler Sharp LLC Hosts DCEx Students
DCEx participants sit around a conference table listening to a panel of distinguished guest lecturers
Sanford Heisler Sharp LLP recently hosted spring DCEx participants where the firm’s DC Partner Saba Bireda, Senior Litigation Counsel John McKnight, and Litigation Fellow Shaun Rosenthal spoke to externs as distinguished guest lecturers.
Sanford Heisler Sharp was founded in an effort to litigate public interest and social justice cases that add significant value to individuals and communities. Sanford Heisler Sharp represents plaintiffs in individual matters and class actions nationwide. The firm’s lawyers specialize in employment and gender discrimination, wage and hour violations, complex civil litigation, whistleblower/qui tam matters, public interest litigation, financial services litigation, prison litigation, and criminal/sexual violence litigation.
DCEx participant Brandon Golfman moderated the panel discussion. Sanford Heisler Sharp attorneys provided students with an overview of the firm’s current practices, including plaintiff-side employment discrimination and whistleblower matters. They also discussed how Sanford Heisler Sharp is working to transform the legal profession by representing female attorneys who experience career-crushing gender discrimination, bringing to the fore employment practices that have historically prevented women from attaining fair compensation for leadership roles.
Students learned about the day-to-day practice of a litigation attorney and the qualities needed to handle complex and sensitive client issues. The panelists encouraged students to be empathetic, dedicated, and detail oriented. The seminar concluded with the panelists offering their advice for navigating the final year of law school and the DC legal market.
2L Rodney Dorilas Reflects on White House Externship
Dorilas will graduate early in December 2019 with a year of legal experience under his belt and a developing professional network in the nation’s capital. Looking to the future, Dorilas reflects on his experiences in DC.
“Through DCEx and the White House Internship Program, I had the privilege to serve as a White House Legal Intern with the Office of White House Counsel. I was one of two law students serving within the Office. During my time as a Legal Intern, I was responsible for researching and writing memoranda on regulatory reform, executive authority, government ethics, and various legal issues arising from ongoing legal disputes with the Executive Branch. I also had the pleasure of assisting the White House Counsel’s Office execute its duties in responding to governmental oversight requests and federal judiciary nominations.
This experience had a tremendous impact on my legal education, as it has brought the classroom teachings to life. For some law students, the legal concepts and theories learned in the classroom, particularly in constitutional law, may be intriguing and intellectually stimulating, but may also seem far-fetched, latent, or insignificant to what we will face in the legal profession. The rules and concepts learned in our first-year courses may seem irrelevant or ancient, but they serve as a foundation to almost every legal issue that we may encounter.
Today, in this political climate, it is more important than ever we understand the history and role of the different branches of government and how each case we will encounter effects the grand scheme of governance, our nation’s civility, and our respect for the rule of law. Working in Washington, DC, specifically with the Department of Justice and now the White House, I have a greater appreciation and understanding of the law.
Gaining real world experience in crafting legal arguments, especially where legal disputes involve separation of power issues—leaving nothing to turn to but the Constitution and founding-era documents—is crucial for future legal practitioners who seek to challenge some of the most captivating and groundbreaking issues before us and on the horizon.
Working under some of the most brilliant-minded scholars and legal practitioners at the White House Counsel’s Office and Department of Justice has given me great insight to what it means to be a lawyer.”
Before joining the College of Law, Dorilas received a bachelor’s degree with honors in criminal justice with a minor in international relations from Florida International University. Before that, Dorilas was a Fire Controlman in the US Navy for over six years where he was in charge of planning and executing the deployment of Tomahawk land attack missiles on a Ballistic Missile Defense destroyer.
What's Next After the Mueller Report? William C. Banks Speaks to WAER
National Security Expert at SU Speaks About What’s Next After Mueller Report
(WAER | April 19, 2019) WAER’s Chris Bolt spoke with Professor Emeritus William Banks on some of the legal and historical aspects of the report and what it means going forward.
One of most significant things about the report William Banks says, might be what’s not there. President Trump was never directly interviewed about any of the allegations.
“His responses to the written questions were that he simply didn’t recall, most of the time when the questions probe his state of mind. Had they obtained oral testimonial from the president would be far more difficult to walk away from direct answer to the question about his state of mind.”
Intent would have to be established for prosecutors to be able to bring any charges for obstruction of justice against the president. But that doesn’t mean the investigation didn’t have legal ramifications … he notes two dozen indictments of others came out of it. Still, no direct questioning of President Trump leaves a hole in any possible criminal case.
He found in the report less redaction that he thought by Attorney General William Barr. Most things blacked out had to do with grand jury materials, things relevant to ongoing congressional investigations, and identification of ancillary witnesses. What does concern him, is the lack of objectivity from the Attorney General’s office.
“The willingness of the justice department to go behind the scenes to allow them to prepare their rebuttal today speaks more of an effort to support the administration than it does to simply speak for the rule of law for the United States.”
Of course you can’t escape the political aspects of the investigation and the report. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who’s a presidential candidate, called it an embarrassing display of propaganda. She said in a release that the nation can’t trust a hand-picked attorney general and that congress should see the full, un-redacted report to really find the truth.
Area Congress members John Katko and Anthony Brindisi had different reactions to the release of the report, both speaking at a public event in Oswego. Katko told Syracuse.com he had no problem with Barr’s press conference and then releasing the report. He’s more concerned with what’s in it and how we reduce Russian influence in elections. Brindisi wants to see a full, un-redacted version before drawing conclusions, though he also does not want the investigation to overshadow other issues that need attention. Professor Banks meanwhile believes the prospect of Congress starting impeachment proceedings is not in the cards.
“I think the democrats recognize if they start an inquiry in the house, they may or may not have sufficient votes to impeach there. If they did, they would certainly not have votes to convict to the senate. It would be a way like the Clinton inquiry many years ago, a lot of effort for vey little outcome, any positive outcomes.”
While the President might not face that challenge, Banks says the whole process draws into question just how Mr. Trump views the office.
“One of the aspects of his presidency is to treat more like a business and a personal fiefdom, as though he was a king or autocrat, rather than a democratically elected leader of a country who shares authority with the congress and the court in between nation government and states. So in many respects, I think the president has treated the office of presidency in a way as no other president has before as though he was above the law. That’s the most dramatic challenge to our constitutional system that I can imagine.”
And he adds things are far from over. There are still ongoing grand jury investigations; congress will have its own investigations and hearings; and Banks expects you should get used to hearing about the report and all manner of reactions to it on the campaign trail.
“I think certainly through the 2020 election, this is not going to be done. And then whatever the result the election produces, certainly the president and perhaps the shape and contour of the congress on the partisan, aside democrats from republicans. Then maybe on the November, 2020, this will all go away, but I doubt that it will before then.”
INSCT Welcomes Five National Security Experts as Distinguished Fellows
The Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism (INSCT)—a collaboration between the Syracuse University College of Law and the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs—has added five senior national security experts to its academic and advisory leadership team.
These Distinguished Fellows—drawn from the upper echelons of the national security and intelligence communities—will assist the Institute's mission with a variety of assignments that will directly benefit students and expand INSCT's portfolio of research and policy projects.
Joining INSCT are Steve Bunnell, Co-Chair of Data Security and Privacy at O’Melveny & Myers LLP, former General Counsel of the US Department of Homeland Security, and former Chief of the Criminal Division at the US Attorney’s Office in Washington, DC; Rajesh De, Chair of the Cybersecurity and Data Privacy practice and Co-Chair of the National Security practice at Mayer Brown LLP and former General Counsel for the US National Security Agency; Avril Haines, Senior Research Scholar at Columbia University, former Deputy National Security Advisor, and former Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency; Amy Jeffress, Partner at Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP and former Counselor to the US Attorney General; and Lala Qadir, Associate and Member of the Artificial Intelligence Initiative at Covington & Burling LLP and Lecturer in Law at George Washington University Law School.
"These Distinguished Fellows are five of the leading experts in the field of national security law and policy, and I am thrilled that they have chosen to affiliate with the Institute," says the Hon. James E. Baker, Director, INSCT. "They bring extraordinary practice experience and diverse expertise to Syracuse. They will expand the Institute's reach in areas such as emerging technology, data privacy, and cybersecurity. Even better, if you think they are great at what they do—and they are—they are even better people, among the most honorable and ethical public servants I have known. If your mission is to train the next generation of thought leaders and practitioners in the field of public and private national security law, you would want this team of Fellows on your side."
Among the Fellows' roles—in Syracuse, New York City, and Washington, DC—they will help teach national security courses; lecture in the Institute's speakers program; provide students with career advice and guidance; and offer insights and input regarding the Institute's classroom and practical curriculum and its research and policy portfolio. They also will help the Institute stand up and teach a cutting-edge course on the practice of private national security law.
“Specifically, the Distinguished Fellows give the Institute the opportunity to fill a need that is not being met," continues Judge Baker. "They will help us teach students at the College of Law and the Maxwell School what they need to know in order to practice in the area of private national security law and policy—at law firms, as in-house counsel, or as business officers and executives. This is an area of private practice that is growing exponentially, that offers career opportunity for our students, and that is critical to US national security, as well as the protection and advancement of US legal values.” It is anticipated that additional Fellows will join those announced today.
"The addition of these national security experts to the Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism significantly strengthens the Institute's already formidable academic and research portfolio," says Dean Craig M. Boise, Syracuse University College of Law. "Crucially, INSCT Distinguished Fellows will open up important opportunities and avenues for law and public policy students, especially in emerging areas of national security studies, such as artificial intelligence, data privacy, and transnational crime."
“With decades of experience working on some of the most pressing law and policy issues of our time, INSCT Distinguished Fellows will add greatly to our students’ understanding of the practice of national security law and policymaking," says Dean David M. Van Slyke, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. “Their insights as senior civil servants and practitioners in political positions, as well as in private practice and academia, will enrich the student experience and expand the depth and reach of Maxwell’s thought leadership and emerging research.”
William C. Banks Reviews the Mueller Report with KPCC
AirTalk special: DOJ releases redacted Mueller report to the public
(KPCC (Los Angeles) | April 18, 2019) Two years and countless subpoenas and indictments later, the Department of Justice has released a redacted version of the Mueller report to the public.
In a press conference, Attorney General William Barr on Thursday laid out in advance what he said was the "bottom line:" No collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government hackers.
Barr said at a news conference that the president did not exert executive privilege to withhold anything in the 400 page-plus report. And he said the president's personal attorney had requested and gotten a chance to review the report before its public release.
Barr said that no one outside the Justice Department has seen the unredacted Mueller report. And he added that no redactions were either made or proposed outside of the small group of Justice staffers that pored over Mueller's report.
- Nick Akerman, partner at the New York City office of Dorsey & Whitney LLP; he is a former Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York and served as Assistant Special Watergate Prosecutor with the Watergate Special Prosecution Force
- Miriam Baer, professor of law at Brooklyn Law School where she specializes in corporate and white-collar crime and criminal law and procedure
- William C. Banks, professor emeritus of law, public administration and international affairs at Syracuse University
- Christian Berthelsen, legal reporter at Bloomberg
- John Eastman, professor law and community service and director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence at Chapman University
- Robert G. Kaufman, public policy professor at Pepperdine where he focuses on U.S. foreign policy, national security and international relations; author of “Dangerous Doctrine: How Obama's Grand Strategy Weakened America” (University Press of Kentucky, 2016)
- Laurie L. Levenson, professor of law at Loyola Law School and former federal prosecutor
- Justin Levitt, professor of law at Loyola Law School and former deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department under President Obama; he tweets @_justinlevitt_
- Amanda Renteria, chair of Emerge America, a national organization that works to identify and train Democratic women who want to run for political office; she is the former national political director for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign; she tweets @AmandaRenteria
- Sean T. Walsh, Republican political analyst and partner at Wilson Walsh Consulting in San Francisco; he is a former adviser to California Governors Pete Wilson and Arnold Schwarzenegger and a former White House staffer for Presidents Reagan and H.W. Bush
Disability Rights Clinic Helps Village of Cazenovia with Accessibility Project
Disability Rights Clinic Director Professor Michael Schwartz, 3L Albert Karmi, and 2L Allison McVey—along with Ted Bartlett, an adjunct instructor at the Syracuse University School of Architecture—presented a preliminary accessibility plan to the village of Cazenovia, NY, Board of Trustees on April 1, 2019. The Board is exploring a project to enhance accessibility of commercial buildings on the north side of Albany Street between Kinney Drugs and Lincklaen Street.
The “Village of Cazenovia Accessibility Study” is a joint effort among the College of Law; the School of Architecture’s Freedom By Design Program; and Crawford & Stearns PLLC, architects and preservation planners.
“The Disability Rights Clinic has, in partnership with the village of Cazenovia, identified a need for an accessible sidewalk along Albany Street,” said McVey at the meeting, as reported by the Cazenovia Republican. “As you all know, there is a step up for each of the shops there, which makes it difficult for people with disabilities and a number of other members of the community to access those shops without the use of a ramp.”
The proposed design includes a concrete ramp with four access points, one at each end of the street and two in the middle.
The plan also features a simple iron safety railing, selected to blend in with the character of the historic buildings. In front of each storefront, a break in the railing would allow for easy pedestrian access to the building. All other specific design decisions would be left up to the village, according to McVey.
Collaborating with the Disability Rights Clinic, the site measure-ups and initial drawings were produced by the school of architecture’s Freedom By Design community service program. Joseph Picciano, an associate and project architect at Crawford & Stearns, completed the design.
According to McVey, the proposed plan is designed to benefit not only individuals with disabilities and wheelchair users, but also many other community members, including parents with strollers, the elderly and veterans with mobility issues.
Shubha Ghosh Speaks to Law360 About Apple vs. Qualcomm
After Ceasefire With Apple, Qualcomm’s War Continues
(Law360 | April 17, 2019) The global licensing flare-up between Apple and Qualcomm was extinguished abruptly Tuesday with a dramatic settlement announced moments after opening arguments. The deal ends all litigation between the California tech giants, but it doesn’t directly impact the U.S. government’s enforcement action against the chipmaker.
Here, Law360 looks at what’s ahead for Qualcomm after its armistice with Apple.
The Pressure to Settle
Apple and Qualcomm offered few details about the settlement resolving Apple’s lawsuit alleging the chipmaker violated antitrust law by requiring companies that assemble iPhones and iPads to pay for both its cellular network-accessing modem chips and for a license on its patented technology. Qualcomm was also pursuing its own suits accusing Apple of patent infringement in jurisdictions around the globe and seeking to block imports into the U.S. and elsewhere of iPhones that allegedly infringed its products, namely those using chips made by Qualcomm rival Intel.
Under the deal, Apple will pay an undisclosed amount to Qualcomm. The tech giants also reached a six-year licensing agreement, effective April 1, which could be extended another two-years, and a multiyear chipset supply agreement.
The companies struck the deal a day-and-half into trial, after jury selection and opening arguments from both sides ...
... Qualcomm had clear reason to settle. Experts note the pressure bearing down on Qualcomm, not just from Apple, but from antitrust enforcers around the world and private litigants who’ve targeted licensing practices that allegedly allowed it to overcharge Apple billions of dollars.
“They clearly were seeing years of litigation ahead if they didn’t come to some sort of agreement,” said Shubha Ghosh, head of the Syracuse Intellectual Property Law Institute.
Tim Green L'94 Awarded Chancellor's Medal
Thane Green accepts the Chancellor's Medal on behalf of his father, Tim Green L'85
College of Law alumnus Tim Green L'94—one of the most accomplished student-athletes in Syracuse University history—was awarded the Syracuse University Chancellor's Medal at the One University ceremony in Hendricks Chapel on April 12, 2019. Tim's eldest son, Thane, received the award.
The annual ceremony brings the University community together to celebrate the faculty, staff, and student recipients of the University’s most prestigious awards and honors. The Chancellor’s Medal is one of two major awards conveyed, along with the Chancellor’s Citation for Excellence.
Green was a legendary member of the Syracuse Orange football team from 1982-1985. He helped the Orange begin its resurgence under head coach Dick MacPherson. Dubbed the “Renaissance Man of American Football," after a stellar career at Syracuse, Green enjoyed success as a player in the National Football League and then as a commentator, before becoming an accomplished attorney at Barclay Damon, an NPR legal commentator, a TV host, and a best-selling author. Recently, Green was diagnosed with Lou Gehrig's Disease, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). His life story and battle with ALS have been profiled on CBS 60 Minutes.
The Chancellor's Medal was first presented in 1967 as the Centennial Medal on the occasion of William P. Tolley’s 25th anniversary as Chancellor. The name of the award was changed in 1972. It is given to “extraordinary individuals, whose career success and philanthropic contributions have had a significant impact on society and the University.” Previous recipients include Aaron Copland, Alfonse M. D'Amato, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Ralph Nader, and Donna E. Shalala.
3L Erika Simonson and 2L Aubre Dean Win the Inaugural Entertainment and Sports Law Negotiation Competition
Aubre Dean and Erika Simonson
3L Erika Simonson and 2l Aubre Dean prevailed over 3L Sophie Bober and 2L Josh Steele in the inaugural intra-school Entertainment and Sports Law Negotiation Competition. Dean also captured the Best Overall Advocate award. The final round followed the conclusion of the 5th Annual Entertainment and Sports Law Symposium.
James Zeszutek L’76, Partner, Dinsmore and Shohl; Professor John Wolohan, Professor of Sports Law and Management, Syracuse University David B. Falk College of Sport and Human Dynamic and Adjunct Professor, College of Law; and Kevin Belbey, L’16, Agent, The Montag Group judged the final round.
Forty-eight students took part in the competition. The Entertainment and Sports Law Society and the Advocacy Honor Society were co-sponsors of the competition.
Syracuse University College of Law Enters into 3+3 Admissions Agreements with Three Historically Black Colleges and Universities
Dean Craig M. Boise signs a the 3+3 admissions agreements with three Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
Syracuse University College of Law has entered into 3+3 admissions agreements with three Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) located at Atlanta University Center: Clark Atlanta University, Morehouse College, and Spelman College. The agreement was signed at an April 15, 2019, ceremony at Atlanta-based law firm Taylor English Duma LLP with representatives from all three HBCU and the College of Law participating.
The 3+3 program allows students to finish the bachelors and juris doctor degrees in an accelerated format by completing all coursework required for the undergraduate major in three years and finishing their degree during their first year of law school at Syracuse. J.D. students at the College of Law may also jointly earn a master’s degree at other Syracuse University schools and colleges, including the top-ranked Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs and Newhouse School of Public Communications. The combination of the 3+3 and joint degree programs permits a student to earn as many as three degrees in just six years—a year less than generally required for just an undergraduate and J.D. degree at most other institutions.
“Partnering with these distinguished HBCU to create a 3+3 program significantly reduces the time and cost required for qualified African-American students to obtain a 21st-century legal education at Syracuse,” says College of Law Dean Craig M. Boise. “This is one of the ways we can address the legal profession’s need for more diversity among the ranks of lawyers. I join our faculty, staff, and students in looking forward to students from these renowned colleges becoming members of our College of Law family.”
“Developing the accelerated dual degree (bachelor’s and juris doctor degrees) between Clark Atlanta University and Syracuse University College of Law is mutually beneficial. This endeavor aligns with our efforts to expand academic pursuits for Clark Atlanta graduates,” says Dorcas Bowles, Provost, Clark Atlanta University. “As such, this partnership increases our students’ academic and career success and will serve as a beacon of access and opportunity for African Americans and other underrepresented populations in the field of law.”
Says Sharon L. Davies, Provost, Spelman College, “As one of the nation's top producers of black women applicants to law school today, Spelman College is excited to enter into this agreement with Syracuse University College of Law. With this new partnership, Spelman students interested in careers in law will be able to complete their undergraduate studies and legal studies in six years instead of seven, saving a full year of college expenses, and enabling them to bring their unique talents to the field of law one year sooner.”
“I am excited by the opportunities that this program will provide for our students who are interested in pursuing careers in law. This program is a testament to Dean Boise’s and Syracuse’s commitment to the recruitment of black students, and I hope it serves as a model for law schools across the nation,” says Matthew B. Platt, Ph.D., Chair and Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Morehouse College.
“As someone who counts both Morehouse College and Syracuse University College of Law as alma maters, I have great pride in knowing future law students will be able to experience the same institutions that helped me realize my career goals under this accelerated path,” says Michael Johnson L’93, a partner at Taylor English Duma LLP. “I am honored to host the signing ceremony at Taylor English Duma, and I look forward to following the progress of the 3+3 students—future Orange law alumni—as they embark on their legal careers.”
In addition to the 3+3 agreements, the College of Law recently expanded its Externship Program to Atlanta to provide field placements in the city and its surroundings, allowing local students to network and to gain experience close to home. The College of Law also has a liaison in Atlanta who will be on campus to meet with students and answer any questions about the program.
Clark, Morehouse, and Spellman colleges join Alfred University, LeMoyne College, Nazareth College, St. John Fisher College, and Syracuse University’s Whitman School of Management as 3+3 partners of the College of Law.
Former Dean Craig Christensen Passes
Craig W. Christensen
March 11, 1939 - April 3, 2019
It is with great sadness that we announce the sudden passing of Craig W. Christensen at his home in Ventura, CA, after a valiant battle with Alzheimer’s and COPD.
Craig was born in Lehi, UT, to Helen Sena (Thompson) and Wane Eric Christensen on March 11, 1939. He was Professor of Law Emeritus and held a B.S. (Hons.), Political Science, 1961, Brigham Young University, and a J.D. (magna cum laude), 1964, Northwestern University. He was a member of the Order of the Coif and the Illinois State Bar. A distinguished legal educator, he was a Past President of the Law School Admission Council (LSAC), had more than 30 years of teaching experience, and was Dean at two law schools.
“I'm an old-fashioned law teacher and believe in the Socratic Method in which the approach is principally to engage people," he said. "As a result, I spend more time asking questions than answering them."
Following law school, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Northwestern University Law Review, Craig practiced law with the Chicago firm of Kirkland & Ellis and later served as Executive Assistant to the Chairman and President of the Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company. He began his career in legal education as Executive Director of the National Institute for Education in Law and Poverty and Lecturer at Northwestern University.
In rapid ascent, Craig served as Legal Advisor to the President and Associate Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, and then accepted deanships at the law schools of Cleveland State and Syracuse universities. He then served as President and Executive Director of LSAC for nearly five years, followed by a year as Visiting Professor of Law at Hastings College of Law. He was appointed to the Southwestern faculty in 1992. He became Professor of Law Emeritus in 2006.
Long active in the area of gay rights, Craig served on the National Advisory Committee of the Law and Sexuality Journal. He is a former member of the Board of Directors of the LAMBDA Legal Defense and Education Fund and the New York State Human Rights Political Action Committee; Past Chair of the State of New York's Task Force on Gay Issues; and Founding Chair of the Association of American Law Schools Section on Gay and Lesbian Issues. He also served on the California Democratic Party State Central Committee and was a delegate to the 2000 Democratic National Convention.
Craig was preceded in death by parents, Helen and Wayne Christensen; brother, Corey Christensen; and daughter, Cara Christensen. He is survived by his husband and partner of 37 years, Anthony J. Mullen; son, Michael (Denise), Cuyahoga Falls, OH; daughter, Laura Ghirardini (Peter) Swampscott, MA; son, David, Adelaide, Australia; brothers, Russel (Kathi), Las Vegas, NV, and Chris (Anne), Bozeman, MT; sister, Karma Wagstaff, Salt Lake City, UT; plus 11 grandchildren, many nieces and nephews, and his pugs, Elektra and Bruce.
Special blessings and thanks go to Liz Moten, his caregiver for many years. With her help Craig was able to enjoy his home by the sea till the end.
A memorial will be held on May 9, 2019, at 10 a.m. for family and friends at the Edward J. Ryan and Son Funeral Home, 3180 Bellevue Ave., Syracuse, NY. Family will receive friends from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m. before the service. Burial will be in Valley Cemetery.
In lieu of flowers, please donate in Craig’s name to the Alzheimer’s Association of CNY, 441 W Kirkpatrick St., Syracuse, NY 13204.
Innovation Law Center Students Help Allied Microbiota Commercialize a Clean Tech Breakthrough
One of the many impressive tasks that Innovation Law Center (ILC) research associates perform when writing proprietary reports for clients of the New York State Science and Technology Law Center (NYSSTLC) is getting up to speed very quickly with novel and often complex technologies. Becoming competent with groundbreaking biotechnology was certainly necessary for the report presented to Allied Microbiota, a New York City-based company that is developing a microbial product to remediate difficult-to-treat organic pollutants.
It helped to have a couple of College of Law students with biology backgrounds working on the report.
"My undergraduate degree is in biology," explains Senior Research Associate Gabrielle Sherwood, a third-year law student. "This project was a nice refresher on what I learned in my biology classes, although describing this complex technology was a challenge." However, adds Sherwood, another member of her team—2L Christina Brule—holds a Ph.D. in biochemistry. "Her knowledge came in very useful for the technology description and the intellectual property section."
Sherwood and Brule, along with 3L Trevor McDaniel and 2L Kristian Stefanides, formally presented their report to Allied Microbiota in March 2019. Allied Microbiota CEO Frana James and CSO Dr. Ray Sambrotto describe the students' work—which analyzes her company's intellectual property claims, the potential market for its technology, and the regulatory landscape for bioremediation—as "really insightful". "They offered us a new perspective about regulatory hurdles, prospects, and certifications we probably need to get," adds James.
James says she discovered the Innovation Law Center through her connection to FuzeHub, a New York State manufacturing extension program supported by Empire State Development’s Division of Science, Technology & Innovation (NYSTAR). Through FuzeHub, James met NYSSTLC Associate Director Molly Zimmermann and ILC Adjunct Professor Dom Danna ’71. Eventually, Allied Microbiota joined 14 other start-up technology companies that ILC students have been assisting, on behalf of NYSSTLC, during the spring 2019 semester.
A Columbia University-trained engineer with an MBA from the India Institute of Management, James founded Allied Microbiota three years ago with Sambrotto, a Research Professor at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. James and Sambrotto became interested in the commercial potential of biological soil remediation products that were being developed in the lab.
Despite some commercialization setbacks—as James says, "laboratory technologies can be difficult to scale up, and we certainly ran into our share of challenges"—yet fueled by funding and assistance from the National Science Foundation, PowerBridgeNY, SUNY-Stony Brook, NYSERDA, and others, Allied Microbiota is now in the large-scale testing phase for its PacBac product.
PacBac uses naturally occurring, non-pathogenic thermophilic bacteria to naturally destroy soil contaminants that are difficult and expensive to clean up using current remediation technology. These recalcitrant contaminants include a rogues' gallery of dangerous chemicals—dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, benzene, toluene, and xylene—that are often deposited in soil by industrial processes, creating dangerously polluted brownfield sites.
"These are pretty toxic soil contaminants that resist decomposition," observes Sambrotto. "Current treatment methods include dredging the soil and disposing of it in a landfill or thermal destruction. These methods are expensive, use a lot of energy, and are not sustainable. PacBac is both an effective and cost-effective biological solution that uses a bacterium and enzymes. It degrades contaminants very fast."
Supervised by Professor Danna, the student research team made observations and recommendations in three areas that will help Allied Microbiota bring PacBac to market. "We created a patent landscape and researched the chances of Allied Microbiota obtaining a patent. We also completed a freedom-to-operate analysis, to see what patents are out there and to determine if Allied Microbiota may infringe any of them," explains Sherwood. "The regulatory section was a challenge because it's a heavily regulated sector. We identified permits required, which are often concerned not with the remediation itself but with moving contaminated soils."
According to Sherwood, the market analysis section of the report proved very fruitful. "We identified competitors and potential customers. The market for bioremediation is potentially huge, with companies under order to clean up sites and consumers demanding more environmentally friendly methods of removing contamination."
"The remediation market is huge," agrees James. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, there are more than 450,000 brownfield sites in the US and more than 1,300 "superfund" priority list sites known to be releasing extremely hazardous substances. James says the remediation market potentially could be worth $65B by 2025.
Allied Microbiota is currently testing PacBac in collaboration with Clean Earth, a specialty waste management company. James says that small-scale field tests have been positive, and now the companies are working together to expand the testing with the goal of eventually decontaminating commercial grade sites. "We know the product works well, and we know how to implement it. Now we need to scale it up and offer it at a commercially viable price."
Commentary: Are Nonresident Aliens Exempt From the Loss of Personal Exemptions?
By Robert Nassau
Director, Low Income Taxpayer Clinic
(Re-published from Procedurally Taxing | Jan. 29, 2019) Until recently, I thought I had left International Tax in my side-view mirror (“rear-view mirror” is a cliché, and I was taught to avoid those). Back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth and I was a Big Law Tax Associate, three of my “specialties” were Eurodollar transactions, foreign tax credit maximization, and FIRPTA (don’t bother to look it up), none of which was relevant when I moved to Little Law, but all of which validated my bona fides when Syracuse University College of Law was looking for an adjunct to teach International Tax. Years later, SUCOL had sadly dropped International Tax, but happily added a Low Income Taxpayer Clinic, which I, as the devil they knew, got to direct. And, as they say, the rest is history. (So much for avoiding clichés.)
Last year, our Clinic formed a relationship with the Legal Aid Society of Mid-New York, through which LASMNY referred to us a number of foreign “temporary agricultural workers.” These gentlemen, mostly from Jamaica, validly reside in the United States and work in our agriculture industry. They receive H-2A Visas and have Social Security Numbers. Some come every year; some come for two or three months; and some come for as long as six or seven months. (For those readers whose notion of New York is Broadway and Wall Street, please note that the Empire State is #2 nationally in apple production, #2 in cabbage (think sauerkraut), #3 in pumpkins and grapes (we have over 400 wineries), and #4 in sweet corn, squash and snap beans. We are also #1 in the world, both quantitatively and qualitatively, in maple syrup. Take that Justin Trudeau!)
For tax purposes, these non-US citizens are classified either as resident aliens, in which case their income tax treatment is nearly identical to that of a citizen, or nonresident aliens, in which case their income tax treatment is governed by special rules in Subchapter N of the Code (Section 861 et seq.). The definitions of resident alien and nonresident alien are set forth in Section 7701(b), which, for the holder of an H-2A Visa, looks to a formula based on days of physical presence within the United States. By way of simple example, someone in the US for 90 days a year would always be a nonresident alien (“NRA”), whereas someone in the US for 150 days a year would quickly become a resident alien.
Among the special rules governing the tax treatment of NRAs are Sections 873(a) and (b), which limit an NRA’s allowable deductions. For tax years prior to 2018, an NRA was not allowed a standard deduction, but was allowed a personal exemption, pursuant to Section 873(b)(3), which provided – and still provides:
The deduction for personal exemptions allowed by section 151, except that only one exemption shall be allowed under section 151 unless the taxpayer is a resident of a contiguous country or is a national of the United States.
Now comes TCJA 2018, which, as we all know, was not the poster child for precise statutory draftsmanship, but did, for tax years 2018 through 2025, eliminate personal and dependent exemptions, replacing them with a larger standard deduction and expanded child tax credit. Or at least it did this for US citizens and resident aliens. But what about NRAs? ...
2Ls William Wolfe & Omar Mosqueda Featured in Bar Reporter
Diversity & Inclusion Interns Rock
(Re-published from OCBA Bar Reporter | March 2019) Syracuse was at first unfamiliar to [second-year College of Law] law students William Wolfe and Omar Mosqueda.
The OCBA Diversity and Inclusion Committee together with the William Herbert Johnson Bar Association earlier this year recommended both 2Ls for the CNY Legal Diversity Internship Program.
The bar associations co-sponsor the program that seeks to increase diversity in the legal profession in Syracuse by attracting second- and third-year law students to work in paid positions with area law firms and legal employers for the spring semester.
These 10-week internships offer Wolfe and Mosqueda each 10 hours of work a week and a stipend of $1,800. Plus free parking.
In 2018, the program’s inaugural year, the Hancock Estabrook law firm welcomed [College of Law alumnus] Julian Harrison L'18, the first Diversity Intern. This year, Mosqueda, accepted the internship at the 130-year-old law firm.
“Hancock Estabrook is proud to have been the first law firm to participate in this program, and we look forward to its continued growth. We believe it is an important tool in promoting greater diversity in the legal profession and local bar association,” said Robert Whitaker, chair of the firm’s Labor & Employment Practice Group.
“This program offers a great opportunity for students to gain private law firm experience and build their resume, while also allowing firms like ours to more deeply self-reflect based on feedback from law students as to how we may improve diversity.”
Joining Hancock this year is Bond, Schoeneck & King, another long-established Syracuse firm, where William Wolfe heads two afternoons a week, plus Fridays from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.
“They do a good job making me feel welcome,” Wolfe said. He didn’t expect it, but when he arrived at BSK Wolfe was introduced to nearly every attorney whose door was open, and he was shown his own “nice, neat office.” “I was shocked,” he said.
Aware of his interest in litigation, the bulk of his assignments are from that department and consist of drafting memoranda, client letters, and researching applicable statutes, and case law.
“We greatly appreciate the opportunity to participate in the internship program this semester. While Will is getting real life work experience, we also benefit. Over the years Bond has hosted diverse interns throughout our different offices and we will gladly continue to do so, not only because we benefit from new thoughts and perspectives during the semester of the internship, but also because some of our post-graduation hires have resulted from these types of programs,” Bond management stated.
Wolfe hails from Chicago’s west side, a notoriously rough area of a city known for its storied criminal past and present ...
Read the whole article (Bar Reporter pp6-8)
Aparicio & Carbajal Reach Quarterfinals of the Herrara Moot Court Competition
3Ls Esther Aparicio and Kelsea Carbajal with coach Jose Perez L'07
Third-year students Esther Aparicio and Kelsea Carbajal reached the quarterfinals of the annual Uvaldo Herrera National Moot Court Competition, which took place during the 2019 Hispanic National Bar Association’s Corporate Counsel Conference, March 20-23, 2019, at the Albuquerque (NM) Convention Center.
Now in its 24th year, the Herrara Moot Court Competition attracted 32 teams to argue the case of Jed Akers and National Cable Channel v. Lorna K. Fuentes, US President.
"The competition is always a constitutional law problem that is presented as though to the Supreme Court," explains Carbajal. "This year, the problem involved the revocation of a White House correspondent’s press pass and its implications regarding the 1st and 5th amendments to the Constitution. The competition consists of a brief and an oral argument."
This year the team was coached by Professor Suzette Meléndez and alumnus Jose Perez L'07, with Perez traveling to Albuquerque with the team.
Michael Schwartz to Keynote University of Bialystok Disability Conference
Professor Michael A. Schwartz, Director of the Disability Rights Clinic, will be one of three keynote speakers at a disability law conference organized by the Faculty of Law, University of Bialystok, Poland on April 11-12, 2019. The Polish university is an international partner of the College of Law.
At the conference—titled "Axiological and Legal Aspects of Disability"—Schwartz will discuss "The Ontology of Being Deaf in an Aural World." Addressing some of Schwartz's themes, the conference's tracks will examine the philosophical, legal, ethical, theoretical, health, educational, and practical aspects of disability. Other keynote speakers are Professor Gracienne Lauwers, Vrije Universiteit, Brussels, Belgium, ("Generating Awareness and Capacity of Schools to Implement Adequately the Rights of Pupils with Disabilities") and Professor Anna Drabarz, Faculty of Law, University of Bialystok ("Measuring the Effectiveness of Disability Rights: Some Challenges of Collecting, Analyzing, and Reporting Disability-Related Data").
Schwartz, Professor Cora True-Frost, and alumnus Eric Namungalu LL.M.'18, are featured in a special disability studies issue (volume 23 issue 4) of the peer-reviewed Białostockie Studia Prawnicze (Bialystok Legal Studies). Schwartz is also a member of the disability conference's Scientific Committee, along with Professor Lauwers and Professor Maciej Perkowski, University of Bialystok.
Cora True-Frost Pens OpEd on the Rwandan Genocide Anniversary
What Have We Learned From the Rwandan Genocide?
By Cora True-Frost
(Re-published from U.S. News & World Report) This first week of April marks the 25th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide, a three-month long massacre during which Hutu militants killed an estimated 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus after the Hutu president was killed. The international community responded to the atrocities late, and then sought accountability after the genocide by establishing the International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda (ICTR) to try those most responsible.
It is important that we remember the horror of the genocide and reflect on the mistakes made, in order to work toward a more peaceful future. One of the main takeaways from the ICTR's atrocity trials is that words matter.
The world of the Rwandan genocide may to most people seem far removed from the United States. It does not to me. I am a law professor who grew up an Army brat, often abroad. I graduated high school in Nuremberg in the former West Germany – the site of the famous Nuremberg Tribunal held in the wake of the Holocaust. I know that words matter. Always mindful of the horrors of the Holocaust and the ways that democratic majorities can scapegoat and dehumanize minorities, my professional focus has been in constitutional and international law.
The law, and particularly international criminal trials, should teach us about past mistakes. The legacy of Rwanda's genocide has some compelling messages for American people about the power of our words, and the danger of hate speech. Few of us are immune to the polarizing media coverage. Our leaders and media pundits use generalizations about cultures and fear-mongering to drive home support for policy in a very profound and impactful way. Creating hate as opposed to understanding will lead to repeat mistakes.
This week in particular, we should heed the legacy of Rwanda's genocide, reminding our nation of what can happen when we don't identify and speak about the impact that fear has on our united psyche.
We Americans know words matter. We famously have strong free-speech protections. We are outliers in the international community for refusing to penalize hate speech. However, even those of us with the strongest commitments to free speech understand that speech can be dangerous and even constitute incitement ...
Roy Gutterman Speaks to Spectrum About Ending the Release of Mugshots
State Police to End Release of Booking Photos, Per Budget Agreement
(Spectrum News | April 4, 2019) Booking photos will no longer be released automatically by the New York State Police as part of an agreement in the newly-approved state budget.
The State Police will release booking photos, commonly known as mugshots, only if there is a “specific law enforcement purpose” the agency said in a statement on Wednesday. Exceptions include searching for fugitives or missing people, they said ...
... "I see a slippery slope. That if the government is going to wake up one day and say 'Well, maybe we don't want this information to go out' maybe other types of important public information will be withheld too," said Roy Gutterman, Syracuse University media professor ...
Syracuse Civics Initiative & NYEx Students Participate in the Northern District’s Live Courtroom Reenactment
The US District Court of the Northern District of New York recently hosted a live courtroom reenactment of the US Supreme Court case Russo v. Central School District No. 1 that included timely discussions of patriotism, loyalty, and the First Amendment. This re-enactment was part of the Second Circuit’s Justice for All Program.
Syracuse Civics Initiative (SCI)Co-Directors Professor Kim Wolf Price L’03 and Professor Lauryn Gouldin—along with civics fellows 3L Matt Wallace and 2L Katherine Brisson—promoted this event to students at the College of Law and many school districts throughout Central New York. Since this is an annual event hosted by the Second Circuit’s Justice for All Program, SCI expects to continue its involvement with live courtroom reenactments in the future.
NYEx students Brisson and 3Ls Alexander Robinson, Jenifer Taylor, and Michael Varrige—along with Wolf Price—all had speaking rolls in the live reenactment. The reenactment brought together members of the Central New York legal community in an effort to inspire area high school students to engage in civics learning and discourse. US District Court Judge Mae D’Agostino L’80 directs the reenactments for the Northern District of NY with the assistance of US Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of New York the Hon. Therésè Wiley Dancks L’91 and Chief Judge of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York Margaret Cangilos-Ruiz.
The Syracuse Civics Initiative is a Syracuse University CUSE (Collaboration for Unprecedented Success and Excellence) Grant project. Through the Initiative, Gouldin and Wolf Price are working with courts, bar associations, school districts, and other organizations to develop and promote civics education programming for Central New York.
Pictured are (L to R): 3L Michael Varrige, Kim Wolf Price L’03, 3L Jenifer Taylor, Judge Dancks L’91, 3L Alexander Robinson, and 2L Katherine Brisson.
Syrian Accountability Project Releases Report on 2018 Gaza Demonstrations
An Endless Tragedy: A Report on the Incidents Regarding Demonstrations in Gaza
Syracuse University College of Law students working for the Syrian Accountability Project have released an exploratory account of the violence that has occurred along the border of the Gaza Strip and Israel starting in March 2018. "An Endless Tragedy: A Report on the Incidents Regarding Demonstrations in Gaza" examines acts of violence perpetrated by both sides of a conflict that has become known by Palestinians as "The Great March of Return". The report—supervised by Distinguished Scholar in Residence David M. Crane L'80—has been sent to the United Nations, which continues its own analysis of the conflict through the UN Human Rights Council Independent International Commission of Inquiry, of which Crane is a former member.
Authored by third-year law students Margaret Mabie and Brandon Golfman, the report covers actions that took place through December 2018. On March 30, 2018, violence erupted along the Gaza/Israel border fence as Palestinians began protesting Israel's blockade of Gaza and demanding the "right of return" to land lost in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.
According to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the ongoing protests—which have continued into 2019—have claimed the lives of 189 Palestinians (with roughly 19,000 injured) and one Israeli soldier. Israel's use of deadly force—against what it claims are militants aligned with Hamas—was condemned in June 2018 by UN General Assembly Resolution ES‑10/L.23. This resolution calls on Israel to protect Palestinian civilian protesters, to allow humanitarian assistance into Gaza, and to work toward mediation with the Palestinian government.
"We looked at potential crimes committed by all sides in the conflict," says Mabie, "and we wanted to inspect the facts because no amount of politicking can erase reality. We want the report to be seen as neutral and measured. We weren't doing the bidding of any side in the conflict."
The report's structure, explains Mabie, follows that used by SAP in its reports on the Yazidi Genocide, the gas attack on the Syrian province of Idlib, the Siege of Aleppo, and sexual violence in the ongoing Syrian Civil War.
The Gaza report begins with a historic overview of the conflict between Israel and Palestine and an examination of "Nabka" (the 1948 Palestinian exodus) and "Nabka Day," which the 2018 demonstrations were intended to commemorate. After an overview of the 2018 protests, the report then provides a highly detailed, day-by-day analysis of the violence in its Conflict Mapping Narrative, which uses open sources and on-the-ground reporting to pinpoint legally relevant acts perpetrated by all sides of the conflict. The narrative is accompanied by a Crime Base Matrix that isolates acts of violence that may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity, with specific articles of international humanitarian law cited for each act.
At the heart of the report is the question about what differentiates ordinary civic protest from armed, asymmetric conflict. On one side of this question is the fact that the March 30, 2018, demonstration began with "an estimated 30,000 Palestinians gathered at six points along the border to protest Israel’s policy toward Palestine ... [many] bussed by Hamas". The report's Crime Base matrix for that day notes that "Palestinian protesters hurled rocks at Israeli soldiers and rolled burning tires toward the border fence ... [which] served as the predicate act for Israeli use of force against the protesters."
On the other hand, the June 2018 UN resolution expresses "deep alarm at the loss of civilian lives and the high number of casualties among Palestinian civilians, particularly in the Gaza Strip, including casualties among children, caused by the Israeli forces". In February 2018, the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry released its own analysis of the Gaza protests, titled "No Justification for Israel to Shoot Protesters with Live Ammunition".
"An Endless Tragedy" recommends that individuals on both sides of the conflict responsible for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity should be prosecuted by a domestic court of competent jurisdiction or "failing that, the United Nations Security Council should exercise its authority to submit the matter to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in accordance with Article 13(b) of the Rome Statute."
Spring 2019 International Scholar Series Begins with Talks on Arbitration, the Mafia, and Egyptian Protest
Gian Marco Bovenzi discusses the “Anatomy of Mafia-type Organizations”
On April 3, 2019, the Syracuse University College of Law Office of International Programs began its spring International Scholar Lecture Series with three short lectures, on arbitration in Madagascar, Mafia-type Organizations in Italy, and recent protests in Egypt.
In “The Road Less Traveled: Exploring Arbitration in Madagascar,” Fulbright scholar Michelle Rafenomanjato discussed how arbitration has emerged in Madagascar and addressed key challenges and opportunities faced by the Malagasy Arbitration Center over the years.
“Anatomy of Mafia-type Organizations” explored past and current Italian struggles against organized crime. Gian Marco Bovenzi explained the organizations' dynamics, structure, crimes, and victims, as well as how this phenomenon affects Italian society and economy and the legal framework used to tackle it.
The recipient of an Open Society Foundations Civil Society Leadership Award, Hassan Mosad Ahmed addressed the connection between graffiti and protest in Egypt over the past eight years in “Graffiti and Protest in Egypt to Promote the Rule of Law”.
2Ls Aubre Dean and Julia Wingfield Win the 47th Annual Mackenzie Hughes LLP Edmund H. Lewis Appellate Advocacy Competition
2Ls Aubre Dean and Julia Wingfield
2Ls Aubre Dean and Julia Wingfield prevailed over 3Ls Elle Nainstein and Diane Williamson in the 47th Annual Mackenzie Hughes LLP Edmund H. Lewis Appellate Advocacy Competition. Wingfield was selected as Best Advocate and 2Ls Rick Miller and Carly Rolph won the Best Brief award.
Final round judges were the Hon. Rosemary S. Pooler, US Circuit Judge of the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; the Hon. William Q. Hayes L’83, US District Judge for the Southern District of California; the Hon. David N. Hurd L’63, US District Judge for the Northern District of New York; the Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, US District Judge for the Northern District of New York; and the Hon. Diane L. Fitzpatrick, Judge on the New York State Court of Claims.
James E. Baker Delivers Remarks on Counterterrorism at Oklahoma City University School of Law
INSCT Director the Hon. James E. Baker was a participant at the 2019 Stephen Sloan Seminar at Oklahoma City University School of Law on March 28, 2019. His remarks—delivered in conversation with Homer S. Pointer, Senior Fellow of the Murrah Center for Homeland Security Law and Policy—were titled “The Evolving Legal Framework of Counterterrorism.”
This year’s Sloan Seminar—“Assessing the Future of Domestic and International Terrorism”—was billed as a “a conference honoring the ground-breaking contributions of Dr. Stephen Sloan to the field of counterterrorism, [bringing] together experts in counterterrorism analysis, policy, and national security law.” It was co-sponsored by the Murrah Center and the Center for Intelligence and National Security at the University of Oklahoma.
Among other pressing topics, Baker addressed the recent attack in Christchurch, New Zealand, the role of corporate social responsibility in regulating social media content, the First Amendment implications of regulating hate speech, and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. “Law,” he noted, “is one thing that unites all Americans. By ‘law’ I mean the principles of justice, due process, and security, not specific provisions of individual laws.” He added, “This law is America’s national security strength and virtue.”
In addition to Judge Baker’s remarks, other speakers explored “The US Perspective on the Future Direction of Terrorism,” “The European Perspective on the Future Direction of Terrorism,” and “Reflections on 40 Years of Counterterrorism Efforts, the Operational Dynamics of Terrorism, and What Lies Ahead.”
Joining Judge Baker at the seminar were Michael J. Boettcher, Senior Fellow at the University of Oklahoma Center for Intelligence and National Security; David N. Edger, Managing Director and Founder of 3CI Consulting LLC and former CIA officer in the clandestine service; Robert A. Kandra, Senior Advisor with the Chertoff Group, Advisor to the XK Group, and former CIA officer in the clandestine service; Homer S. Pointer, Senior Fellow of the Murrah Center for Homeland Security Law and Policy, Oklahoma City University School of Law; Magnus Ranstorp, Research Director at the Centre for Asymmetric Threat Studies, Swedish National Defense University; James L. Regens, Regents Professor and Founding Director of the University of Oklahoma Center for Intelligence and National Security; and Stephen Sloan, Noble Foundation Presidential Professor Emeritus of Political Science, University of Oklahoma.
3L Matthew Wallace Profiled by American Bar Association
3L Matthew Wallace, with 3L Gabrielle Bull
Larger than life: Matthew Wallace represents students nationwide
(ABA for Law Students | March 28, 2019) Can you imagine being the voice of 140,000 law students nationwide? Matthew Wallace can since that’s his current role as the ABA Law Student Division law student at-large to the ABA Board of Governors. His overarching goals in representing law students throughout the country are transparency, advocacy, and solidarity.
These concepts have guided his representation throughout his term this year and will likely remain prevalent when the next student representative fills his shoes.
Why transparency is critical
“I was concerned by the recent closures of law schools across the country, as well as the mounting student debt crisis,” said the 3L student at Syracuse University College of Law. “While I want all students to achieve their dream of being a lawyer, I also believe in setting practical expectations so that every student knows what lies ahead.”
To achieve this concept, Wallace has continued the work of previous LSD leadership in working to allow undocumented students to take bar exams. He has also worked to renew the ABA’s commitment to its advocacy for public service loan forgiveness.
A resolution Wallace has been very active advocating for is the upcoming change to ABA Standard 316. The modification would require that all law schools have a 75 percent bar pass rate within two years of graduation for each class or risk losing accreditation.
“While this resolution aligns with my goal of promoting transparency by ensuring that law schools adequately prepare students who can pass the bar, it also presented unprecedented challenges in that it would jeopardize the accreditation of schools with a high minority attendance,” Wallace said. “It’s for this reason that the LSD voted to oppose this resolution and actively campaigned against it at the 2019 ABA Midyear Meeting.”
Wallace is frank in his thoughts for the future of the ABA. “As our demographics and the world around us morph daily, we stand at a threshold never encountered before,” he said. “When people look back at my time on the LSD Council, I want them to see someone who successfully navigated the relentless changes and left the LSD in a position to succeed moving forward.”
A history of advocacy
In his role as the law student at-large on the Board of Governors, Wallace speaks on behalf of all 140,000 law students before the board and the association. “With a 44-member board, it’s easy to see how the law student voice could be drowned out in a sea of strong personalities,” Wallace said. “To counter this, I consistently remind myself that law students represent the largest majority of ABA members and the future of the profession.
“We deserve a right to help craft the future of the ABA, and that’s a message I’m proud to carry forward before the board,” he said ...
3L Donya Feizbakhsh was Recognized as the 5th Best Advocate at the Brooklyn Regional of the ABA National Appellate Advocacy Competition
Corri Zoli Presents Terrorism, Security Papers at ISA 2019
Corri Zoli, Director of Research at the Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism, presented two papers and was a panel discussant at the 2019 International Studies Association Annual Convention in Toronto, Canada, on March 27 and 28, 2019.
At the Wednesday session of "Revisioning International Studies: Innovation and Progress," Zoli presented on the "Challenges for Contemporary Special Operations Forces" panel. Her paper—"Terrorist Critical Infrastructures, Organizational Capacity and Security Risk"—joined others on topics such as computer-mediated threat assessment, weak states, ethic conflict, and terrorists’ use of emerging technologies.
On Thursday, Zoli joined the "Shaping the National Security State" panel and read "Leviathan Revisited: Assessing National Security Institutions for Abuse of Power and Overreach." Other papers on this panel addressed civil‐military relations, the defense industry, and Cold War Military Balance.
Later in the same day, Zoli was the Discussant on the panel "New Directions in Qualitative International Studies" chaired by Eric Stollenwerk of Freie Universität Berlin. This wide-ranging discussion looked at modern qualitative international studies through the lenses of multi-method research, philosophy, autoethnography, and public diplomacy.
1L Joseph Tantillo Wins the 9th Annual Hancock Estabrook LLP 1L Oral Advocacy Competition
1L Joseph Tantillo and James P. Youngs
The final round was judged by the Hon. Margaret Cangilos-Ruiz, Chief Judge of the Syracuse Division of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York; the Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, US District Judge for the Northern District of New York; the Hon. Thérèse Wiley Dancks L’91, US Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of New York; the Hon. Andrew T. Baxter, US Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of New York; and Dean Craig M. Boise.
James P. Youngs, Chair of the Litigation Department, Hancock Estabrook, LLP presented the award.
Shubha Ghosh Weighs In on Charter Spectrum Controversy
Will Charter Spectrum Stay in New York?
(City & State NY | March 27, 2019) New York is tangled in a months-long, multi-front war with Charter—the merged entity of Charter Communications and Time Warner Cable—and the end to the conflict seems to keep getting further away.
The state’s Public Service Commission revoked its approval of that 2016 merger in July, saying that Charter Spectrum failed to adequately extend broadband service throughout the state, which had been a condition of the merger. The PSC gave Charter 60 days to come up with an exit plan that would have another provider take over its services ...
... In this week’s “Ask the Experts” feature, we reached out to Aija Leiponen, a professor at Cornell University’s School of Applied Economics and Management; Richard Berkley, executive director of the Public Utility Law Project of New York; Shubha Ghosh, a professor at Syracuse University’s College of Law; Lawrence White, a professor of economics at New York University; telecommunications consultant Doug Dawson and labor reporter Bob Hennelly ...
Why did the Public Service Commission make this move to kick out Charter in July?
Shubha Ghosh: The PSC needed to take action to show it took access to cable services seriously. Charter, some perceived, was not moving fast enough under the terms of the approved merger to provide access to cable and Internet in underserved rural communities.
How will this conflict end?
Shubha Ghosh: It is hard to predict. An easy prediction is that the PSC and Charter will draw up timetables for Charter to follow, with protracted back and forth over the years. PSC is taking a hard line, however, and will not back down. So it may well be that the merger is unwound in New York state with the market, as it is, being open for options. Perhaps the market will provide options consistent with the PSC vision, perhaps not.
How should this conflict end?
Shubha Ghosh: One option is for the state to not unwind the merger but open up an auction for providers to serve rural areas. The deeper problem is the lack of competition in the cable industry which results from the technology and cost structure and lack of more coordinated federal and state oversight to develop communications infrastructure and more competition in the national marketplace ...
Cora True-Frost to Moderate International Disability Law Panel at ASIL 2019
Professor Cora True-Frost will moderate the panel "International Disability Law and the Experience of Marginality" at the 113th American Society of International Law Annual Meeting in Washington, DC, on March 29, 2019.
The panel will address how disability issues increasingly shape the content of international law, including intellectual property law, humanitarian law, criminal law, and immigration and refugee law. But panelists will ask, Are disability issues fully integrated into the agendas of international law and institutions? Does disability as a "rights marker" generate normative, theoretical, and empirical avenues to interrogate issues of intersectionality? And are international legal institutions effective instruments for addressing disability, which directly affects at least fifteen percent of people globally?
This panel will engage cutting edge questions related to how international law and institutions address disability rights and whether they can do more. Panelists will speak to how international human rights law addresses or evades the interaction of multiple categories of difference or experiences of marginality; critically evaluate international-level efforts to integrate disability concerns; interrogate the ability of international human rights law to address issues of identity or marker intersectionality; and propose measures to strengthen international law to tackle disability concerns and rights intersectionality more broadly.
True-Frost will be joined on the panel by Jane Buchanan of Human Rights Watch, disability rights activist Judith Heumann, Siobhán Mullally of National University of Ireland Galway, and Charlotte McClain-Nhlapo of the World Bank Group.
College of Law Team of 3L Sophie Bober and 2L Aubre Dean Place Third at the Evans A. Evans Constitutional Law Moot Court Competition
College of Law Evans Team
3L Sophie Bober and 2L Aubre Dean placed third out of 24 teams at the annual Evans A. Evans Constitutional Law Moot Court Competition. The competition focuses on constitutional law issues.
During the competition, Bober argued whether college students have a property interest in higher education and Dean argued whether Batson challenges were appropriate for LGBTQ+ individuals.
College of Law to host 5th Annual Entertainment & Sports Law Symposium and CLE
The Entertainment & Sports Law Society will present the 5th Annual Entertainment & Sports Law Symposium at the College of Law on Friday, April 12, 2019, 9:45 a.m. – 3:30 p.m., in the Melanie Gray Ceremonial Courtoom.
Music Licensing: The Impact of the Music Modernization Act
Imraan Farukhi, Licensed Attorney and Assistant Professor of Television, Radio & Film, Syracuse University Newhouse School of Public Communications
Matthew Van Ryn, Senior Associate, Melvin & Melvin, PLLC
Candice Stephenson, Counsel of Rights & Clearances, Spotify
Ryan Raichilson, Director, Business & Legal Affairs, Sony/ATV Music Publishing
NCAA Amateurism: How Current Rulings in the Court System Will Effect the College Game
Kevin Belbey L’16, Talent Representative, The Montag Group
Frank Ryan L’94, Partner, DLA Piper
James Zesutek L’75, Partner, Dinsmore and Shohl
Seth Greenberg, ESPN College Basketball Broadcaster
Each panel offers 1.5 CLE credits in the areas of professional practice for a total of 3 credits.
Final Round of Syracuse University College of Law Sports Negotiation Competition
Final Round Judges
Kevin Belbey L’16, Talen Representative, The Montag Group
James Zesutek L’75, Partner, Dinsmore and Shohl
John Wolohan, Licensed Attorney, Professor of Sports Law, Syracuse University Falk College of Sport and Human Dynamics
DCEx Students Meet with JDi Student Brig. Gen. Andrew Gebara at EEOB
DCEx students at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building
Distinguished Guest Lecturer Brig. Gen. Andrew Gebara recently hosted spring DCEx participants in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB). EEOB lies within the White House Compound and houses a majority of the presidential staff. One of the current DCEx participants is placed in EEOB this semester and gave a tour of the building to his co-participants.
Gebara currently serves as the Deputy Senior Director for Defense Policy and Strategy for the National Security Council (NSC). The NSC is housed within the Executive Office of the President and is the principal forum for considering national security and foreign policy matters that include his senior national security advisors and cabinet officials. Gebara has served at this post since his detail from the US Department of Defense began in March 2018.
In his role, Gebara is responsible for the formulation, coordination, and implementation of national policies concerning the nuclear enterprise, including force structure, employment guidance; weapons development; command, control, and communications; resource allocation; and strategic capability.
Gebara gave students an overview of the NSC’s legal authorities and the process in which decisions are made. He also discussed how the NSC has transformed from administration to administration and provided an idea of what his daily operations look like.
Gebara is unique among DCEx speakers as he is currently a 1L in Syracuse University College of Law’s JDinteractive online law degree program. Students kindly and lightheartedly offered their 1L outlines to him as the seminar concluded.
Students also heard from Col. Adam Ake, one of General Gebara’s colleagues. Ake discussed his remarkable career path from Army officer, to Assistant US Attorney, to presidential NSC staff member.
Syracuse University College of Law, Syracuse Law Review to Host Symposium on Online Learning and the Future of Legal Education, April 26, 2019
On April 26, 2019, Syracuse Law Review will bring together legal education experts from across the country for a ground-breaking symposium exploring the impact of online education on law schools and the legal profession. The one-day symposium—“Online Learning and the Future of Legal Education”—will explore the challenges and opportunities presented by online learning.
The symposium comes at an important moment in legal education. Around the nation, law schools and law professors are pioneering new forms of online teaching. Many law schools now make select courses available online or have launched online master’s degree programs. A handful of schools—including Syracuse University College of Law—are even bringing their JD programs online. This new reality raises important questions and theoretical challenges for legal education and the practice of law more broadly.
The symposium will result in the first Law Review issue devoted entirely to exploring these questions. Authors presenting papers addressing the impact of online education on the legal profession include:
- Jack Graves, Professor of Law and Director of Digital Legal Education, Touro Law Center
- Andrew P. Morriss, Dean, School of Innovation and Vice President of Entrepreneurship and Economic Development, Texas A&M University
- Eric S. Janus, President and Dean, William Mitchell College of Law
- Nina Kohn, David M. Levy Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Online Education, Syracuse University College of Law
- James McGrath, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Academic Support, Bar Passage, and Compliance, Texas A&M School of Law
- Michael Hunter Schwartz, Dean and Professor of Law, University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law
- Victoria Sutton, Paul Whitfield Horn Professor and Associate Dean for Digital Learning and Graduate Education, Texas Tech University School of Law
- Noelle Sweany, Clinical Associate Professor, Educational Psychology, Texas A & M University Department of Education and Human Development
- Kellye Testy, President and CEO, Law School Admission Council and Professor of Law, University of Washington School of Law
- David Thomson, Professor of Practice and John C. Dwan Professor for Online Learning, University of Denver Strum School of Law
In addition, the symposium will feature a lunchtime conversation on the regulatory and accreditation landscape for legal education with Barry Currier, Managing Director, Accreditation and Legal Education, American Bar Association. The conversation will be moderated by Syracuse University College of Law Dean Craig M. Boise.
To learn more about the Symposium and to read the full schedule and list of papers, visit law.syr.edu/online-learning-symposium-2019. To RSVP for the program, please email Stephanie Rinko at email@example.com.
Corri Zoli Interviewed by CNY Central About the New Zealand Mosque Shootings
(CNY Central | March 15, 2019)
"We bring in a new perspective on an awful topic a name and a woman we turn to often in times like this. Corri Zoli is an assistant professor at the Maxwell school at Syracuse University ... why the recordings? why record what you've done?"
"I think this is a kind of classic terrorist tactic that we've been seeing since you know 2010 at the least where ISIS and al-Qaeda. I remember in the Toulouse attacks in France, for instance, where they recorded the attacks against a Jewish school with a GoPro video" ...