Experts Matter. Find Yours.

New National UMass Amherst Poll Finds President Trump’s Job Approval Gap Slides 6 Points Since April

Topline results and crosstabs for the poll can be found at www.umass.edu/poll Public approval of Donald Trump’s presidency has dropped by 6 percentage points since April and his approval rating is now 20 points underwater, 38-58, according to a new national University of Massachusetts Amherst Poll of 1,000 respondents conducted July 25-30. “Six months into his second term as president, Donald Trump looks to be on the ropes with the American public,” says Tatishe Nteta, provost professor of political science at UMass Amherst and director of the poll. “Trump’s approval ratings, already historically low for a newly elected president, continue to sink with close to 6-in-10 Americans (58%) expressing disapproval of the job that Trump is doing in office. While Trump remains a popular figure among Republicans and conservatives, Trump’s time in office is viewed more negatively across genders, generations, classes and races, with majorities of each of these groups disapproving of Trump’s performance. With over three years left in the Trump administration, there is still time for him to right the ship and fulfil the promises that catapulted him to the presidency, but the president is not off to the start he or his supporters envisioned.” In the previous UMass Poll, conducted as Trump approached the three-month anniversary of his return to the White House, Trump held a 44-51 approval rating, buoyed by a positive overall approval on his handling of immigration. The new poll, however, has found a significant shift in views on this issue. “Immigration has been central Trump’s political campaigns and his strongest issue in his first few months in office, but the percentage of people who say he is handling it well has dropped substantially from 50% four months ago to just 41% today, a 9-point drop,” explains Raymond La Raja, professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll. “Trump came into the presidency promising change, and he’s made significant alterations in many areas of federal policy,” says Jesse Rhodes, professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll. “He came into office believing that he had limited time to make the changes he promised his most ardent supporters, and moved with unparalleled speed to enact these changes, including sometimes by legally questionable means. Now, it seems, he’s reaping the consequences as a large majority of Americans don’t like these changes. Clear majorities say that Trump has handled his key issues – immigration (54%), inflation (63%), jobs (55%) and tariffs (63%) – not very well or not well at all. With so many Americans grading his handling of public policy poorly, it’s no wonder they disapprove of his presidency.” Rhodes also notes that the president is seeing an erosion in support from one of his most reliable groups of supporters: men. “Trump has cultivated a ‘masculine’ reputation and sought to build support among American men but, strikingly, we find that support for Trump has deteriorated most substantially among members of this group,” says Rhodes. “In April, Trump enjoyed approval from 48% of men, compared with 39% of women. Now, only 39% of men express approval of Trump, compared with 35% of women. “In addition to losing support among men, Trump has seen approval for his presidency crumble among political independents, a critical swing constituency,” Rhodes adds. “While 31% of independents approved of his presidency in April, that number is now down 10 percentage points to 21%. This is really bad news for Trump, and for Republicans who depend on support from independents in close elections.” “Polarization has changed the interpretation of presidential approval ratings,” says Alexander Theodoridis, associate professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll. “Partisans just aren’t willing to evaluate presidents from the other side positively and are reluctant to say negative things about presidents from their own party. So, approval numbers fluctuate within a narrower range. Gone are the days when George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush both achieved approval numbers over 90%. This is certainly true for Trump, who is likely the most polarizing figure in modern American politics. Even in this polarized environment, though, Trump’s approval ratings are low by any standard – he is very close to the practical floor. Especially noteworthy is that nearly half of Americans say they strongly disapprove of Trump and the percentage of Americans who say they strongly approve of Trump has decreased substantially. Even among Republican respondents, only half strongly approve of the president. The GOP should be concerned about these numbers heading into the odd-year elections in 2025 and, especially, the midterm elections in 2026. It is very difficult for a party to win when its leader is this unpopular.” Americans’ views on Epstein and Trump Of all issues surveyed in the latest University of Massachusetts Amherst Poll, one appears to be the greatest drag on Trump’s presidency: Jeffrey Epstein and Trump’s handling of the evidence gathered in the federal investigation of the accused sex-trafficker and his long-time friend. “The Epstein scandal remains a serious vulnerability – indeed, quite possibly, the most serious vulnerability – for Trump right now,” Rhodes says. “Fully 70% of Americans believe he has handled this issue ‘not too well’ or ‘not well at all,’ and nearly two-thirds (63%) believe his administration is hiding information about Epstein. The Epstein scandal is also likely undermining public confidence in Trump more broadly. Indeed, we find that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe that Trump is corrupt and nearly 70% believe he is dishonest. Critically, these numbers mean that many Republicans and conservatives are disappointed with Trump’s handling of the Epstein situation. Republican frustration with Trump’s handling of the Epstein case could erode enthusiasm for his presidency and for Republicans in 2026.” “If Trump and those around him have been wishing the Jeffrey Epstein story would disappear, their wishes have not been granted,” Theodoridis says. “Most Americans (77%) tell us they have heard a lot or some about the Epstein case. In addition to believing that the Trump administration is hiding important Epstein case information, the vast majority of respondents say that a special prosecutor should be appointed to investigate the Trump DOJ’s handling of the Epstein case (59%), that Donald Trump was good friends with Epstein (67%), and that a list of Epstein’s clients exists (70%). Even substantial numbers of Trump voters believe these things. And, when it comes to an Epstein ‘cover-up,’ it seems the buck stops with Trump himself. While a lot of Americans blame Attorney General Pam Bondi (59%), FBI Director Kash Patel (49%), and House Speaker Mike Johnson (47%) for hiding information about the Epstein case, a whopping 81% blame President Trump.” “The controversy over the handling of the Epstein files by the Trump administration has – interestingly – brought Americans together,” Nteta adds. “While on most issues, we see clear and persistent generational, class and racial divisions; on Epstein, Americans across these divides speak with one voice. This controversy has even resulted in agreement across partisan lines as majorities of Democrats and Republicans support a special prosecutor and believe a list of clients exists, and disapproval of Trump’s handling of the whole matter is surprisingly seen among members of Trump’s base, as 43% of Republicans and conservatives indicate that Trump has not handled this issue well.” “Where Trump faces his poorest rating in our poll is on perceived corruption and dishonesty,” adds La Raja. “A clear plurality (49%) sees Trump as ‘very dishonest,’ with an additional 20% saying that he is ‘somewhat dishonest.’ And 45% see him as ‘very corrupt,’ with an additional 20% as ‘somewhat corrupt.’ Only about one-third reject those labels entirely. Trump also gets low ratings on transparency – a majority (52%) say Trump is not at all transparent, his weakest score after dishonesty. Only 23% believe that he’s very transparent. For a candidate who brands himself as a truth-teller and disruptor, this appears to be a credibility gap.” “Strength is Trump’s strongest attribute,” La Raja explains. “Fifty-eight percent see him as very or somewhat strong, indicating appeal among his base and possibly swing voters who value ‘toughness.’ However, views on his competence are split evenly, with 52% saying he’s competent to some degree, while 48% say not at all.” Voter Regret? “Since President Trump took office, a number of reports of regretful Trump voters have been covered in the nation’s leading media outlets,” Nteta says. “From voters upset with Trump’s immigration policies to supporters who take issue with the president’s unwillingness to release the files associated with the Epstein case, there seemed to be a wellspring of regret among Trump’s once loyal base. Our results suggest that while there are, in fact, areas where the president is weak, most notably on his handling of the economy and the Epstein controversy. When asked directly, close to 9-in-10 (86%) would vote for Trump again if given the opportunity to revisit their 2024 presidential vote choice. These results indicate that the number of regretful voters covered in the mainstream press may be overblown, as the overwhelming majority of Trump voters remain in the president’s camp.” “Only 1% of Trump voters say they regret their vote and would choose differently, 2% say they ‘might’ choose differently and 3% say they wish they hadn’t voted at all,” Theodoridis says. “When we simply ask voters how they would vote if they could go back and recast their ballot, 6% of Trump voters tell us they would vote for Harris, while only 2% of Harris voters say they would switch to Trump. There is clearly more erosion in support among Trump voters than among Harris voters and, in what is likely small consolation to Harris and her campaign team, significantly more 2024 non-voters who say they wish they had voted indicate they would now cast a vote for the former vice president. In a relatively close election, shifts of these magnitudes might have been decisive, but there are no ‘take-backs’ in electoral politics, so these numbers are best used to inform choices going forward.” “Our results are not wholly positive for President Trump, and there exist areas of concern for his team moving forward,” Nteta warns. “Since April, the number of Trump voters expressing strong confidence in their vote for Trump has declined by 5 percentage points. Additionally, we find small increases in the number of Trump supporters who have mixed feelings about their vote and who indicate that they would ‘rather not have voted.’ Finally, 14% of Trump voters indicate that they would not vote for Trump if given the chance to revisit, while only 8% of Harris voters express a similar sentiment. Time will tell whether the growing number of disaffected Trump voters are the canaries in the coal mine, indicating a larger problem among the Trump coalition and the MAGA movement more generally.” “We do find a meaningful percentage – 31% – of Trump voters unwilling to say they feel very confident they made the right choice,” Theodoridis adds. “Nineteen percent of Trump voters tell us they are still confident but have concerns, and 6% tell us they have mixed feelings about their vote. Given what we know about the psychological predispositions against admitting to having been wrong, these numbers suggest some softening in support for Trump among the very voters who returned him to the White House last November. This should certainly be alarming for Republican politicians. However, for Democrats or journalists looking for a mass mea culpa from Trump voters, our numbers are, perhaps, sobering.” Methodology This University of Massachusetts Amherst Poll of 1,000 respondents nationally was conducted by YouGov July 25-30. YouGov interviewed 1,057 total respondents who were then matched down to a sample of 1,000 to produce the final dataset. The frame was constructed by stratified sampling from the full 2023 American Community Survey (ACS) one-year sample with selection within strata by weighted sampling with replacements (using the person weights on the public use file). The matched cases were weighted to the sampling frame using propensity scores. The matched cases and the frame were combined, and a logistic regression was estimated for inclusion in the frame. The propensity score function included age, gender, race/ethnicity, years of education, region, and home ownership. The propensity scores were grouped into deciles of the estimated propensity score in the frame and post-stratified according to these deciles. The weights were then post-stratified on 2020 and 2024 presidential vote choice as ranked on gender, age (4-categories), race (4-categories) and education (4-categories), to produce the final weight. The demographic marginals and their interlockings were based on the sample frame. The marginal distribution of 2020 presidential vote choice and its demographic interlockings were based on a politically representative “modeled frame” of US adults, using the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) public use microdata file, public voter file records, the 2020 Current Population Survey (CPS) Voting and Registration supplements, the 2020 National Election Pool (NEP) exit poll, and the 2020 CES surveys, including demographics and 2020 presidential vote. The marginal distribution of 2024 vote choice was based on official ballot counts compiled by the University of Florida Election Labs and CNN. Demographic interlockings for 2024 vote choice were based on CNN’s 2024 Exit Polls. The margin of error of this poll is 3.5%. Topline results and crosstabs for the poll can be found at www.umass.edu/poll

President’s Discussion of Conspiracy Theories Have “No Parallel in American Politics”

Peter Baker, the chief White House correspondent for The New York Times, interviewed Dr. Meena Bose about conspiracy theories that appear to be consuming the Trump administration. “The president’s repeated discussion of multiple conspiracy theories, most recently about the 2016 election, has no parallel in American politics,” said Dr. Bose. “Presidential allegations that have no factual basis undermine public confidence in the political system and present dangerous challenges to constitutional principles and the rule of law, particularly if they are not subject to checks by other institutions.” Dr. Bose is Hofstra University professor of political science, executive dean of the Public Policy and Public Service program, and director of the Kalikow Center for the Study of the American Presidency.

What a Mamdani Win Could Mean for LI

Lawrence Levy, associate vice president and executive dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies, was interviewed by Newsday about the New York City mayoral race and how front-runner Zohran Mamdani’s policies could impact Long Islanders if he should win the election.

Election Watch 2025: Farnsworth Breaks Down Virginia’s Political Landscape

With early voting setting new records and national politics reshaping local elections, Professor Stephen Farnsworth is helping journalists and voters make sense of the noise. As director of the Center for Leadership and Media Studies at the University of Mary Washington, Farnsworth continues to be a go-to expert across major outlets. In just the past few weeks, he’s been featured in: • NBC Washington • WAMU • Yahoo News • Richmond Times-Dispatch • DC News Now • Virginia Mercury Farnsworth has weighed in on everything from Kamala Harris’ rising prospects to the effects of Trump’s policies on rural Virginia. Whether he’s speaking to the League of Women Voters or breaking down the numbers for DC news outlets, Farnsworth brings clarity to the chaos. For journalists covering Virginia politics and U.S. elections, Farnsworth is a key source of insight. Click on the icon below to connect with: Stephen Farnsworth, Professor of Political Science and International Affairs; Director, Center for Leadership and Media Studies Expertise: Virginia politics, media and messaging, U.S. elections, disinformation.

Experts in the Media: With Kemp bowing out of mid-terms is Georgia staying blue?

Control of the Senate is key for most administrations, and with a razor-thin edge favoring the Republicans, any pickup to keep control of the Senate after the mid-term elections is a priority. However, with a heavy favorite in Gov. Brian Kemp stepping away from the chance to run for the GOP, many are speculating the once traditionally Republican stronghold could stay blue under the Democrats with the re-election of Sen. Jon Ossoff. It's a topic that has political watchers and media trying to cover and figure out as parties get ready to get back on the campaign trail for next year. It's also why journalists and news outlets like Newsweek are connecting with experts like William Hatcher, PhD, for expert opinion and perspective. An award-winning scholar, Hatcher is the chair of the Department of Social Sciences and a professor of political science. His research focuses on the connection between public administration and the development of local communities. Kemp's decision not to challenge Ossoff in the state's 2026 Senate race could be a boon to Democrats' chances of holding the seat in the battleground state, according to recent polls... Kemp's announcement follows months of speculation about whether he would challenge Ossoff, a Democrat first elected in 2020. Polls suggest Kemp would have been the strongest candidate against Ossoff and that other potential Republicans trail the incumbent senator in a hypothetical matchup. "Given that Kemp was perhaps the strongest candidate to face Ossoff, his decision to not run will make it difficult to find another candidate that would be as competitive. However, the election is over a year away, and in politics, a lot can happen in that amount of time," William Hatcher, chair and professor of social sciences at Augusta University, told Newsweek on Tuesday. A poll from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution found that Kemp led Ossoff by 3.3 points (49% to 45.7%), Ossoff led three other prospective challengers. That poll surveyed 1,426 respondents from April 24 to April 27, 2025, and had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. Hatcher said the state Republicans face a "limited" bench to challenge Ossoff, but whoever prevails will eventually have to defend Trump's "unpopular economic policies that will most likely adversely affect states like Georgia, particularly his recent commentary on leveling tariffs on the film industry – a industry that has a significant presence in Georgia." May 06 - Newsweek The race is obviously already on for the mid-term elections in November of 2026, and if you're a journalist looking to cover Georgia politics, let us help. William Hatcher, PhD, is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

Expert Q& A: ‘The Pope is also a monarch’

Kathleen Comerford, Ph.D., professor of history at Georgia Southern University, specializes in Catholic history in the 16th and 17th centuries. She is also an associate editor for the Journal of Jesuit Studies, which focuses on the work of the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), a religious order within the Catholic Church. Pope Francis was the church’s first Jesuit pope. With the global significance and rarity of the conclave, Comerford answered frequently asked questions about how the conclave works, how the conclave process has evolved over time, and what the passing of a pope means for the Catholic Church and the world. Question: What does the passing of a pope mean for the world? Comerford: Multiple things! First of all, there are 1.4 billion Catholics in the world scattered in many different countries. The pope is a unifying figure for all of the Catholics. He represents something immediate in the sense that he’s the head of the church and is a recognizable figure. The pope is also a monarch. I was just talking with my classes about this. He is the head of the government of the Vatican City State, which is the smallest independent state in the world. It has a very long history itself. Pretty much everybody who lives in Vatican City works for the Vatican. The pope is one of the few elected monarchs in history. He is responsible for financial and political decisions, and he has ambassadors around the world as a result of his role in global policy. Question: How is a new pope selected? Comerford: The College of Cardinals will meet for an election called a conclave, and they actually stay in a dormitory-like place in Vatican City for it. They are sequestered from the public, and they take some time to meet, pray and vote. The cardinals aren’t supposed to be sitting around talking about who would be a really good pope, but we don’t know whether they do because they’re sequestered and nobody is supposed to talk about it. They will likely take a vote on the first day, but that’s not required. Every subsequent day, they can take a maximum of four votes; two in the morning and two in the afternoon until a candidate gets a two-thirds majority. Question: What does the voting look like? Comerford: There are ballots, and the cardinals write their preferred candidate on the ballot, and then they put their vote in a chalice. To count the votes, there’s a group of three people who are in charge of counting and then announcing the results to the fellow cardinals. There are 252 cardinals, but only 135 of them are eligible to vote because anyone over the age of 80 is ineligible. The procedure where only cardinals can elect the pope dates from 1059. The secret ballot and the two-thirds majority requirement is from 1621. The sequestration for the process dates from 1271 because they argued about who the new pope would be for two years and nine months; a total of 33 months. And so, they decided that the only way to make sure that this didn’t happen again would be to create this scenario with the cardinals locked in a room with a key. Question: When one of the candidates receives a two-thirds majority and becomes the next pope, how will it be announced? Comerford: Well, this is kind of fun, because they have four votes every day until one of the candidates receives a two-thirds majority. After they take the votes, the papers used to vote are burned. How the news is shared to the crowds outside is based on the color of smoke. If the smoke is black, that means no one received the majority and there’s no new pope yet. If there’s white smoke, it means there’s a new pope. This practice really only dates to the early 19th century. At first, it was just if there was smoke, there was no pope; if there was no smoke, then there was a pope. In 1914, they changed this aspect of the election so that black smoke means “no pope” and white smoke means “new pope.” Question: It’s expected that the next pope will be one of the cardinals in the room when they vote, yes? Comerford: Yes, but it doesn’t have to be. There have been a lot of popes, but in the last 200-300 years, there hasn’t been somebody who wasn’t in the conclave that was elected. Theoretically, they could nominate somebody who’s not a cardinal and the whole room could say, “yes, that’s the person we want as pope.” However, they don’t vote by acclamation anymore. They stopped doing that in the 19th century. Question: Pope Francis appointed 108 of the cardinals, so that’s a total of 80% of those eligible to vote for the next pope. How likely is it that we see a pope similar to the late Francis, considering he provided the electorate for his successor? Comerford: First of all, he deliberately went out and created cardinals in places where there had never been cardinals before. And he didn’t do that by saying, “I’m going to find somebody who’s like-minded to me.” He just said, “There are a lot of Catholics in Myanmar and they’ve never had a cardinal. So I’m going to make sure that there’s a cardinal now.” Most of these new cardinals are in places like Rwanda, Cape Verde, Tonga, Myanmar, Mongolia and so on. So these are non-European cardinals. Now, less than 40% of the voting cardinals are European. So to speculate on how similar they are to Francis, you have to break down what Francis was. There has been his entire pontificate about how he’s the first American pope, but his parents were born in Italy. He didn’t grow up speaking Italian, but it was a dialect of Italian as well as Spanish, because he grew up in Argentina. He was the most European you can get and still be an American. Another part of the question is, will the new pope be somebody who is of a similar mind to Francis in terms of his governance, which was very devolved. He introduced this idea of “synodality,” which is about fairly consistent communication with groups of people. Pope Francis was not particularly monarchical or hierarchical. There is also the aspect of his thinking that leans more to the left than the right on a number of social issues like immigration, women’s rights, the rights of minorities and immigration. He opened a lot of conversations, which the very right leaning portions of the church have been very uncomfortable with. If you're interested in learning more about this topic and want to book time to talk or interview with Kathleen Comerford then let us help - simply contact Georgia Southern's Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.

Historical Significance of the Papal Name

In the wake of the historic election of Pope Leo XIV, the first American to ascend to the papacy, scholars and observers alike are reflecting on the global, historical and theological implications of his early statements and symbolic choices. His decision to take the name Leo – a name not used for over a century – immediately evokes comparisons to both Leo XIII and Leo I (Leo the Great), popes known for their firm leadership and dynamic engagement with the world. Baylor University’s Elisabeth Rain Kincaid, J.D., Ph.D., director of the Institute for Faith and Learning and an expert on early modern theology and Catholic Social Thought, said choosing the name Leo is significant, especially in today’s world. Through his choice of name, rhetorical style and theological references, the new pope is signaling a clear vision for a Church that is simultaneously grounded in tradition and open to global dialogue, Kincaid said. Kincaid is currently at work on a monograph – “Business Ethics for a Flourishing Life: Catholic Social Thought in the Modern Workplace” – in which she argues for the continued importance of Leo XIII’s thought for modern life. If you're covering the news about Pope Leo XIV and are looking to know why Cardinal Robert Prevost chose that name - we can help. Elisabeth Rain Kincaid is an author, speaker, teacher, and theologian. She has published broadly in peer-reviewed journals and popular publications. She is a frequent speaker at conferences, churches, and professional events on topics including business ethics, virtue and character, Christian engagement with law and politics, and work and vocation. She is currently the Director for the Institute for Faith and Learning at Baylor University. In her teaching, she draws upon her years of experience as a white-collar criminal defense attorney and a private equity professional, along with her ministry experience. Elisabeth is available to speak with media about this topic - simply contact Shelby Cefaratti-Bertin, M.A., Assistant Director of Media and Public Relations at Baylor University, Shelby_Cefaratti@baylor.edu or 254-327-8012 to arrange an interview today.

Media Alert: Experts on the Papacy & Conclave

With the Conclave now underway to select the next pope, the world turns its attention to one of the most sacred and consequential rituals in the Catholic tradition. Rooted in centuries of ceremony and held within the hallowed walls of the Sistine Chapel, this moment carries deep historical, theological, and cultural weight. But it is also a defining juncture for the Church itself. The election of a new pope is not only a matter of tradition—it will shape the direction of the Catholic Church as it navigates urgent issues in an increasingly modern and secular world. From social justice and interfaith dialogue to the role of women and the Church’s stance on global challenges, the decisions of the next pontiff will ripple far beyond Vatican walls. Explore our network of leading experts in Catholicism, the papacy, and ecclesiastical governance—and connect with them for timely commentary, interviews, and deeper insight into this pivotal moment for Catholics worldwide. Featured Experts

President Weighs in on Local Mascot Dispute

Lawrence Levy, associate vice president and executive dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies, was interviewed by WPIX News about President Donald Trump weighing in on the Massapequa school district’s insistence on keeping its indigenous mascot name (the Chiefs) and emblems. Levy said that the president’s involvement is related to a hotly contested election for Nassau County executive this fall. “This is a hot-button issue,” he said, “that President Trump would help his fellow Republicans with.” Massapequa is regarded as a heavily Republican area.

An Expert Guide to the Papacy and Pope Francis

The death of Pope Francis marks a pivotal moment for the Catholic Church, ending a papacy that redefined the Church's relationship with the modern world. As the College of Cardinals prepares to gather in conclave, Catholics across the globe are closely watching to see whether the next pontiff will build upon Francis' legacy or chart a new course. The following experts are available to provide insight into a range of related topics, including Pope Francis' enduring impact and what lies ahead for the world's 1.4 billion Catholics: Massimo Faggioli, PhD Professor, Theology and Religious Studies Dr. Massimo Faggioli is a world-renowned expert on the history and administrative inner workings of the Catholic Church, with specific expertise in the papacy, Vatican II, the Roman Curia, liturgical reform, new Catholic movements and Catholicism and global politics. As quoted on NPR: "Historically, we see in different conclaves a certain swinging of the pendulum. What the conclave and the next pope cannot do is to ignore and deny the changing features of global Catholicism, which is much less European, much less white, less North American and more Global South..." Kevin Hughes, PhD Chair, Theology and Religious Studies Dr. Kevin Hughes is a leading historical theologian, offering insights into the life, legacy and impact of Pope Francis. He can also speak to the significance of the pope in Catholicism and the influence of his teachings on the global Catholic Church. As quoted on Scripps News: "[Pope Francis' selection] was really the Church extending beyond the limits of its European imagination. His Latin American identity was really crucial to embracing a new moment within the Church and opening the door in so many ways, and I think he bore witness to that throughout his papacy." Jaisy Joseph, PhD Assistant Professor, Systematic and Constructive Theology Dr. Jaisy Joseph is a trained ecclesiologist, able to address a wide range of topics relating to the papacy, conclave process and Catholic Church. Previously, she has commented on the Church's presence in Asia and the Global South, offering expert commentary on its growth, challenges and shifting influence. As quoted by ABC News Digital: "[The election of someone from the Global South would be] a move in that direction of how to be a global church. That move from a Eurocentric church to a truly global church—I think that's what Francis really inaugurated." Patrick Brennan, JD Professor of Law; John F. Scarpa Chair in Catholic Legal Studies Professor Patrick Brennan is an expert on the conclave process and the main rules that govern it. He can also speak to topics such as the contemporary and historical importance of secrecy in the conclave, what the cardinals may be looking for in the next pope and the factors that cause similarities and differences from one conclave to the next.  As quoted on Fox 29's Good Day Philadelphia: "The purpose of the general congregation is for the cardinals, who don't know each other in some cases, to get to know each other better as they learn about the current state of the Church and together decide on the needs of the Church and priorities for the new pontificate." Brett Grainger, ThD Associate Professor, Study of Spirituality and American Religious History Dr. Brett Grainger is a go-to source for discussions of the changing face and role of modern spirituality in America. He serves as an expert on contemporary religious trends and can also speak to the broader public reaction to Pope Francis' passing, especially outside of the Catholic faith. As quoted by Courthouse News Service: "People are disaffiliating from a tradition—that doesn't necessarily mean in fact that they don't believe in God anymore...What's more important is 'Is this giving me life? Is this making my life more meaningful? Is this giving me the kind of energy and purpose that I'm looking for?' That's where religion is going." Michael Moreland, JD, PhD Professor of Law and Religion; Director, Eleanor H. McCullen Center for Law, Religion and Public Policy Dr. Michael Moreland is a renowned scholar of constitutional law, religious freedom, public policy and ethics. He can provide expert commentary on items related to the Catholic right and the state of religious politics in the United States. As featured on NBC News Digital: Michael Moreland said the mass appeal of "Conclave" captured how, even in a secular modern age, there is still pervasive intrigue around "the ancient rituals of the Catholic Church." "The significance of the theological and spiritual aspects of Catholicism and this process of electing a pope was kind of reduced into partisan politics," he said. Ilia Delio, OSF, PhD Josephine C. Connelly Endowed Chair in Christian Theology Sr. Ilia Delio addresses topics in her work such as theology and evolution, technology and human becoming and understandings of Catholicity in a world of complexity. She can provide expert insight into Laudato Si', Pope Francis' position on the environment, the relationship between science and religion and integral ecology. As featured in the National Catholic Reporter: "We are clearly an Earth in crisis," with a reversal necessary to secure a sustainable future, said Ilia Delio... Delio posed a series of questions: about the relationship between religion and science; what Laudato Si', and Christianity more broadly, can offer ecological movements; and whether the concept of kinship or creation as family might better reflect humanity's place within nature than "care for creation." To speak with any of these media experts, please contact mediaexperts@villanova.edu.