Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
ChristianaCare MICU becomes first in United States to renew Beacon Award for Excellence for fifth-consecutive three-year cycle ChristianaCare’s Medical Intensive Care Unit (MICU) has earned an unprecedented honor from the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses. Among the thousands of intensive care units in the United States, ChristianaCare’s MICU is the first unit in history to earn a Beacon Award for Excellence from the association, also known as AACN, five times in a row. The Beacon Award is one of the highest achievements in nursing. The recognition lauds hospital units that employ evidence-based practices to improve patient and family outcomes. The award provides gold, silver and bronze levels of recognition to hospital units that exemplify excellence in professional practice, patient care and outcomes. Of the six Beacon Award-winning patient care units currently in the state of Delaware, five are at ChristianaCare: MICU (gold – five-time winner). Cardiovascular Critical Care Complex (gold – three-time winner). Transitional Medical Unit (silver). Surgical Critical Care Complex (silver). Transitional Surgical Unit (silver). ChristianaCare was one of 34 hospitals in the nation in 2021 with multiple units receiving Beacon Awards. Beacon Award designations are active for three years. “Through their relentless and uncompromising pursuit to deliver care that is nonpareil, the nurses of ChristianaCare’s MICU have become the paragon of what our profession can accomplish,” said Ric Cuming, EdD, MSN, RN, NEA-BC, FAAN, ChristianaCare’s chief nurse executive and president of ChristianaCare HomeHealth. “The success of our ChristianaCare MICU, even in the face of this pandemic, also has inspired our health system’s other intensive care units to achieve unprecedented gains in safety and quality that have been recognized with the AACN’s Beacon Award, the touchstone by which all critical care nursing excellence and quality are measured.” Success in caring for patients amidst COVID-19 ChristianaCare’s values of love and excellence are at the heart of the 24-bed MICU at Christiana Hospital, which holds the most Beacon Awards in Delaware. This year’s award is especially meaningful on the heels of yet another difficult surge of COVID-19. “It is a testament to our nurses and the entire care team that we continued to reach milestones in patient safety and satisfaction even during the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Carol Ritter, MSN, RN, CCRN-K, CNML, who has been nurse manager on the MICU for 10 years and a leader on the unit during all of its Beacon Award wins. “Everyone brings a level of expertise to the unit. We truly serve together.” Beacon awards celebrate the professional dedication that a nursing team demonstrates in going above and beyond to provide respectful, expert care. “Meaningful recognition takes on even greater relevance and importance as we continue to meet the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic,” said AACN President Beth Wathen, MSN, RN, CCRN-K. “Being recognized as a Beacon unit underscores these teams’ ongoing commitment to providing safe, patient-centered and evidence-based care to patients and families. This achievement is a tremendous honor to those who have worked so hard to achieve excellence in patient care and positive patient outcomes.” ChristianaCare is one of only 152 health care institutions in the nation and the only in Delaware to have gold-level units. In 2008, the MICU was the first unit in the state to receive the Beacon Award. MICU’s culture of continuous improvement The MICU’s commitment to data-driven, evidence-based care proved especially valuable during the pandemic’s early days. Prone positioning, a technique to help patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to breathe better, had been a longtime practice in ChristianaCare’s ICU. ChristianaCare critical care nurses Maureen Seckel, MSN, APRN, ACNS-BC, CCNS, FCCM, FCNS, and Dannette Mitchell, MSN, APRN, ACNS-BC, CCRN, published an article in AACN Advanced Critical Care that described ChristianaCare’s pioneering adoption of this technique, which ultimately became standard practice nationally in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 and ARDS. “On our unit, we empower the team to provide evidence-based care and have the tools to guide the practice,” Seckel said. “Because of this we were able to incorporate a highly effective, life-saving measure into COVID-19 care early in the pandemic.” Continuous improvement is a hallmark of the unit. The MICU has seven Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program teams that follow data-collection processes to view trends and compare them to national standards to improve care and outcomes. “The whole unit is involved in collecting data to assess and make changes,” said MICU nurse Olivia Ross, BSN, RN, CCRN. Among the MICU’s accomplishments are excellent outcomes in preventing common hospital-acquired infections, even during the pandemic: Zero instances of catheter-associated urinary tract infections in three years. Zero instances of central line bloodstream infections in one year. The unit’s dedication to being exceptional today and even better tomorrow also focused inward during the pandemic. During a time of constant change, the team recognized the need for support to handle the unprecedented stress and strain of the pandemic. “To give the most vulnerable patients the highest levels of care on a consistent basis, we needed to take care of ourselves and one another too,” Ritter said. Ritter and team leaders committed to open-door policies throughout the pandemic, and they partnered with ChristianaCare’s Center for WorkLife Wellbeing to enable licensed psychologists to round on the unit, offering real-time check-ins with caregivers to provide support. The Beacon Award has been a resounding lift and reward for the MICU team members. “Having this recognition, especially during times of distress in the community and the world, signifies excellent nursing care,” said MICU nurse Paige Merring, MSN, RN, CCRN. “And to me it signifies an amazing team and great outcomes, which is the primary purpose of why we are all here.”
Major study reveals the lasting impact of Covid lockdowns
New research from the University of East Anglia reveals first-hand the lasting impact that lockdowns may have had on people’s mental and physical health. The UK’s first Covid lockdown was announced by Prime Minister Boris Johnson exactly two years ago today. Just a few days later, researchers at UEA launched a major project to track the mental and physical health of the nation through lockdowns and beyond. More than 1,000 participants carried out daily surveys – with questions on a range of lifestyle behaviours including physical activity, diet, sleep, smoking, drinking, and drug use. Some of the participants were then interviewed by the research team, to try to understand what was happening for people from their own viewpoints. Listen to what they had to say in our oral history project Lockdown Voices. New findings published today show how people responded very differently to social restrictions depending on their existing circumstances. For those who were less well-off to start with, adapting to lockdown was more difficult, and health behaviours typically worsened to a greater extent. In contrast, those who were better off at the start of the pandemic demonstrated faster adaptation and were more able to respond positively to restrictions, for example by taking to online exercise classes. It is likely that any lasting impact to mental and physical health will therefore be much greater for those who were worse off to start with. Those with good social links and healthy behaviours already in place described in their interviews how they were able to adapt to lockdown and thrive, whereas some of the more vulnerable in our communities had fallen into unhealthy spirals. Prof Caitlin Notley, from UEA's Norwich Medical School, said: “When the first lockdown was announced back in 2020, we started surveying participants from around the UK daily. Our initial results showed that people were eating less fruit and veg, getting less exercise and drinking more alcohol. “It quickly became apparent that lockdown may have lasting consequences for the physical and mental health of the nation. “We wanted to see whether people’s lifestyles changed in the long-term so we continued the study by carrying out regular surveys with the participants, and interviewing some people to find out more.” Now, two years on, the team’s results show how health inequalities are likely to have widened. Prof Notley said: “Social restrictions imposed as a result of the coronavirus pandemic have had a significant impact on health behaviours at the individual and population level. “It’s fair to say that all of our participants’ lives were disrupted by lockdown and they were forced to adapt. “But people responded to the lockdowns very differently and their experiences of social restrictions varied considerably. “Fundamentally, people were hindered or helped by their existing support structures and resources, such as access to technology to engage with the outside world, or private outdoor space. “Those people who had good friends, community links and who were already health conscious, were able to respond positively and better able to cope. “They were able to adapt to the ‘new normal’, use technology to keep in touch with friends and relatives, order veg boxes, carry on with a healthy diet and take part in healthy pursuits in new and innovative ways such as online fitness classes or ‘doing Joe Wicks’. “But lockdowns are very likely to have caused a sustained widening of social and health inequalities. “Those who remained in work outside the home, or who were retired, were the least impacted overall. But those who were unemployed, younger, on a lower income, clinically unwell or told to fully shield were particularly impacted by strict restrictions. “For these more vulnerable people, supportive social factors were taken away or severely restricted. Anxiety and depression worsened, and unhealthy behaviours like exercising less, drinking more alcohol, and eating a poor diet increased. “As we work through the ‘roadmap to recovery’, emphasis needs to be placed on a collaborative, community-based approach, with a focus on what makes us well. “Encouraging membership of community exercise groups, for example, may help those most impacted to engage again with healthy behaviours to keep them well. We also need to pay attention to how those who are less well-off responded more negatively to the policy of lockdown, so that lessons can be learnt for the future,” she added. ‘Disruption and adaptation in response to the coronavirus pandemic – assets as contextual moderators of enactment of health behaviours’ is published in the British Journal of Health Psychology.
Georgia Southern now one of nation’s Top Ten Military Friendly® Schools
Georgia Southern University has earned a 2022-2023 Top Ten Military Friendly® distinction by Viqtory. Georgia Southern ranked at number nine on the Top Ten list. Being named a Military Friendly School is nothing new for Georgia Southern University, having earned a gold-level distinction for the past 10 years. “We are extremely proud to be recognized as being among the 10 most military friendly universities in the country, especially after learning that more than 1,800 schools participated in the survey,” said Georgia Southern University President Kyle Marrero. “With our connections to Fort Stewart, and the fact that about 10% of our student body is military-connected, we have a responsibility to ensure our people and our processes are attuned to the needs of those who are serving selflessly, who are retired or who are related to a veteran or active-duty service member. My thanks to all our faculty and staff who have worked hard to earn this recognition.” Institutions earning the Military Friendly® School designation were evaluated using both public data sources and responses from a proprietary survey. More than 1,800 schools participated in the 2022-2023 survey with 665 earning special awards for going above the standard. Georgia Southern University has a strong and proud history of supporting veterans, current-serving military personnel and their families, and has accumulated many awards for its dedication to the military community. Information and resources are available on the Military and Veteran Services webpage. “We are honored to receive such a significant recognition as a Top Ten Military Friendly® institution,” said retired Col. George Fredrick, Ed.D., director of Military and Veteran Services. “Georgia Southern University maintains strong ties to the military forces in our region, specifically Fort Stewart, Hunter Army Airfield, the Marines, the Georgia National Guard, the Air Force, and the Coast Guard. We proudly serve our veterans and their families while on their academic journeys. We are indebted to our faculty, staff, students and communities for their continued support of our military-connected student population.” Methodology, criteria and weightings were determined by Viqtory with input from the Military Friendly® Advisory Council of independent leaders in the higher education and military recruitment community. Final ratings were determined by combining the institution’s survey scores with the assessment of the institution’s ability to meet thresholds for student retention, graduation, job placement, loan repayment, persistence (degree advancement or transfer) and loan default rates for all students and, specifically, for student veterans. “Military Friendly® is committed to transparency and providing consistent data-driven standards in the designation process,” said Kayla Lopez, national director of Military Partnerships, Military Friendly®. “Our standards provide a benchmark that promotes positive outcomes and support services that better the educational landscape and provide opportunity for the Military Community. This creates a competitive atmosphere that encourages colleges to evolve and invest in their programs consistently. Schools who achieve awards designation show true commitment in their efforts, going over and above that standard.” The 2022-2023 Military Friendly® Schools list will be published in the May and October issue of G.I. Jobs magazine and can be found at www.militaryfriendly.com. Retired Col. George Fredrick is available to answer your questions - simply reach out to Georgia Southern Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.
ChristianaCare and The Wistar Institute advance partnership with new cancer research strategies
ChristianaCare’s Helen F. Graham Cancer Center & Research Institute is advancing its historic partnership with the Ellen and Ronald Caplan Cancer Center of The Wistar Institute in Philadelphia with three new research projects under way. The new research projects consist of a population health study targeting triple negative breast cancer. Other projects focus on a new therapeutic target for epithelial ovarian cancer, the most lethal gynecologic cancer in the developed world, and the development of “mini organs” derived from stem cells. Targeting triple negative breast cancer Delaware has one of the highest incidence rates of triple-negative breast cancer in the United States. This highly aggressive cancer has few treatment options, because the cells test negative for three known treatment targets – estrogen, progesterone and HER2 protein receptors. Working with patient data from the Graham Cancer Center, researchers are investigating potential contributing factors such as diet, alcohol use and genetic variants among women, and the effects of these on cancer metabolism. The team will also examine spatial relationships between cancer “hot spots”—geographic areas with a higher-than-expected prevalence—and modifiable risk factors. Key resources for the study are blood and tissue samples from the Graham Cancer Center’s Tissue Procurement Center and its statewide High-Risk Family Cancer Registry. The research team will be led by Director of Population Health Research at ChristianaCare Scott Siegel, Ph.D., and Lead Research Scientist Jennifer Sims Mourtada, Ph.D., at the Graham Cancer Center’s Cawley Center for Translational Cancer Research (CTCR). They will join Zachary Schug, Ph.D., at Wistar’s Molecular and Cellular Oncogenesis Program. Researching novel therapy for ovarian cancer The latest study supported by the Graham Cancer Center’s Tissue Procurement Program targets KAT6A expression as a novel therapy for ovarian cancer caused by a specific genetic mutation, called PP2R1A. Epithelial ovarian cancer is the most common form of ovarian cancer and the leading cause of gynecologic cancer deaths in the United States. Chemoresistance to currently available platinum-based drugs like cisplatin represents a major treatment challenge, as more than 50 percent of affected women ultimately relapse and die from this disease. Wistar’s Rugang Zhang, Ph.D., leader of the Immunology, Microenvironment and Metastases Program, is focused on developing novel therapeutics for subtypes of ovarian cancer that currently have no effective therapies and on improving the current standard of care. Dr. Zhang’s previous work suggests that KAT6A signaling plays a critical role in ovarian cancer progression. Targeting this signaling pathway could be an effective strategy for treating ovarian cancer. Working with Dr. Zhang on this project are Graham Cancer Center gynecologic oncologists Mark Cadungog, M.D., director of Robotic Surgery, and Sudeshna Chatterjee-Paer, M.D., and Cawley CTCR’s Stephanie Jean, M.D., director of Gynecologic Oncology Research. Also collaborating with the team is Wistar’s Alessandro Gardini, Ph.D., assistant professor in the Gene Expression & Regulation Program. ‘Mini organs’ offer hope for therapeutics Dr. Sims-Mourtada at the Cawley CTCR will lead a new program to culture organ-specific tissue from stem cells that could change the way diseases are studied and treated. These so called “mini organs” or “organoids” are three-dimensional tissue cultures grown in the lab that replicate the complexity and functions of a specific tissue or organ found in the body. Organoids offer scientists a better model for how drugs and other therapeutics might interact with a patient’s particular type of tumor, opening new avenues for precision medicine. “The ability to grow each patient’s tumor in a three-dimensional organoid along with our capability to create patient-derived xenograft or animal models as part of our PDX core, will allow us to fully capture the effects of genetic as well as gene altering behavioral and environmental influences that are lacking in current research models,” said Dr. Sims-Mourtada. “Our collaboration with Wistar to build these programs raises our clinical platform to the next level for studying new cancer biomarkers and treatments.” Advancing a Pioneering Partnership The Graham Cancer Center made history when it signed a first-of-its-kind agreement in 2011 with The Wistar Institute, pairing a National Cancer Institute, NCI-designated basic research institution with a community cancer center that is also an NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). “Our partnership with Wistar has attracted national recognition as a model of collaboration that leverages cutting-edge research to benefit cancer prevention and therapy statewide,” says Nicholas J. Petrelli, M.D., Bank of America endowed medical director of ChristianaCare’s Helen F. Graham Cancer Center and Research Institute. “With Wistar, our productive collaborations over the last decade continue to drive discovery research toward clinical trials to benefit patients here at the Graham Cancer Center and in communities everywhere.” “The Graham Center has been an ideal partner in our mission,” said Dario C. Altieri, M.D., Wistar president and CEO and director of the Ellen and Ronald Caplan Cancer Center. “Our scientists at Wistar have access to clinically-annotated primary patient specimens of the highest quality. As the majority of patients at the Graham Cancer Center are treatment naïve, this collaboration affords an opportunity to conduct unique, high impact mechanistic and correlative studies that will ultimately advance important scientific discoveries that hopefully will lead to better cancer therapies.”
Podcast: Russia expert discusses fears of Putin's 'madness' over Ukraine
Speculation that isolation caused by Covid-19 pandemic could have affected his state of mind Closest advisers said to fear for their lives if they speak out against him Potential scenarios considered include a ‘heart attack-style’ assassination of dictator by senior military and secret services. Two years spent isolating during the coronavirus pandemic have led to a debate that Russian President Vladimir Putin has gone ‘bonkers’, resulting in the invasion of Ukraine. There is now even speculation that only a “heart attack-style” assassination of the dictator by his senior military and secret services could prevent Putin from seeking to expand his borders even further. These themes were discussed by Dr Elisabeth Schimpfössl, a senior lecturer in sociology and policy at Aston University, and author of the award-winning book Rich Russians: From Oligarchs to Bourgeoisie. Dr Schimpfössl, speaking about the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine as part of the 'Society matters' podcast series, presented by journalist Steve Dyson, explained there were two reasons why Putin had decided to invade its neighbour. She considered two potential reasons behind the invasion: “The first is he has always had ambitions to incorporate eastern Ukraine and, particularly, keep NATO at bay and not have it anywhere so close to Russia’s own borders. The second thought is whether Putin might have simply lost it, in a clinical sense.” Dr Schimpfössl said Putin had been “extremely isolated” during the pandemic, with very few people allowed to see him in his “bunker”. She added: “It might well be, as bizarre as it sounds and unimaginable as it might be, that he is losing it and courting advice from people who have such fear of him that they would say what he wanted to hear.” While such madness is currently pure speculation, Dr Schimpfössl explained how people close to him would potentially “fear for their lives” if they contradicted him or alerted him to what a “crazy idea” war was. She said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, whose daughter lives in New York, had wanted to retire “years ago” but Putin would not let him. And she mentioned claims that the former head of Russia’s foreign secret service died from an apparent heart attack after he “pretty much messed up” the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury in 2018. She said: “It’s pretty obvious that similar fears were deep in the bones of all the closest entourage of Putin. They all know pretty well how the system works.” Dr Schimpfössl described reports on how opposition activists and investigative journalists “suddenly, suspiciously, jump off their balcony to their death. And they threaten people that if they don’t jump then their family will suffer”. She suggested that Russia’s billionaire oligarchs could have taken measures if they had seen what was coming. However, the European Union had now added oligarchs onto the sanctions list for the first time after being deeming them “Putin’s cronies” instead of business leaders. Dr Schimpfössl said: “Until Friday, Putin’s plan was to succeed within maybe a week and sanctions would have become effective in weeks, or months from now. Now things have changed and the EU sanctions have gone a big step further on.” She said it will be a “catastrophe” for Russia’s oligarchs now they are subject to sanctions. The only thing that could “save their skin”, she added, is if they create an image of being “anti-war, anti-Putin”. But would this help stop Putin? “Not if he’s completely gone bonkers, then nothing will stop him,” Dr Schimpfössl again speculated. “It makes him extremely dangerous in terms of his announcement of using nuclear weapons. It would be the maddest possible thing to do, but there is no guarantee anymore.” The only thing that could stop him, she hypothesised, was if Putin suffered the similar fate of a “sudden heart attack” following a “silent coup” by Russia’s top military and secret services, although it is pure conjecture that any such actions are being planned. Opinion polls in Russia suggest that only 40 per cent of the population support the action against Ukraine, compared to 80 per cent over the annexation of Crimea in 2014. Dr Schimpfössl said she hoped negotiations between Russia and Ukraine would lead to an agreement, but added: “We know from history when an aggressor sees itself being on the losing end, or things not go according to plan, they often lash out at the very last moment. Any escalation of the conflict could easily and very quickly get very cruel and barbaric.” Episode 1 in series 3 of the ‘Society matters’ podcast and all previous episodes can be found HERE.
Understanding Ukraine and Russia's long history - let UMW's expert help
As the war in Ukraine now extends past a week, many people are trying to understand the reasoning behind Russia’s invasion of its neighbor. Like most of Eastern Europe, the ink that draws the modern borders we see now on maps is still not dry. If you are a journalist looking to know more about this topic and how the past is now affecting the future of Russia, Ukraine and likely Europe – then let our experts help with your stories. Steven Harris is a professor in the University of Mary Washington's Department of History and American Studies. He is a sought-after expert on modern Russian and European history. Dr. Harris is available to speak with media about this important aspect of the crisis in Ukraine – simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
UCI expert sources for the Russia/Ukraine Conflict
On Friday, Feb. 25, 2022, UCI’s School of Social Sciences hosted a webinar titled, “Understanding the Russia-Ukraine Crisis.” Several of the experts below offered perspective on key issues surrounding the escalating conflict between Russia and Ukraine. You can watch or listen to the webinar here: https://www.socsci.uci.edu/newsevents/news/2022/2022-02-25-understanding-the-russia-ukraine-crisis.php UCI faculty members available to comment, and their areas of expertise, are found below. Matthew Beckmann, Associate Professor, Political Science. Professor Beckman studies the organizational structures and operational strategies presidents can use to pick their team, invest their time, focus their attention, channel their effort, discipline their thinking, coordinate their subordinates, and, most importantly, make decisions. Contact: beckmann@uci.edu Jeffrey Kopstein, Professor, Political Science. In his research, Professor Kopstein focuses on interethnic violence, voting patterns of minority groups, and anti-liberal tendencies in civil society, paying special attention to cases within European and Russian Jewish history. As pertains to the Russia/Ukraine conflict, he can speak to politics in Russia and Ukraine, Authoritarianism, NATO and the transatlantic alliance, and European Union policy. Contact: kopstein@uci.edu Erin Lockwood, Assistant Professor, Political Science. Professor Lockwood’s research areas include international political economy and global financial politics. She can speak to questions related to economic sanctions, financial sanctions/financial infrastructure and payments systems more generally (for example, the prospect of cutting off Russian access to the SWIFT financial communications system.) Contact: eklockwo@uci.edu David Meyer, Professor, Sociology, Political Science and Planning, Policy & Design. Professor Meyer’s research examines the relationships between social movements and the political contexts in which they emerge. Topics surrounding the Russia/Ukraine conflict that align with his expertise include sanction strategy; the resistance strategy that might emerge in Ukraine in the face of occupation; the history of the Cold War and its influence today; and the possibility of a powerful peace/isolationist movement emerging in the U.S. Contact: dmeyer@uci.edu Gustavo Oliveira, Assistant Professor, Global & International Studies. Professor Oliveira is a specialist in global political economy and critical geopolitics, focusing on the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) and international commodity markets, especially agricultural trade and natural resource governance. He can speak to the basis of the Russia/Ukraine conflict on natural resources, and the repercussions of the conflict for international commodity markets, inflation, and disruptions to global food supply chains. He can also speak about the anti-war movements in Russia, Europe, the United States, and broader political repercussions of the conflict in Brazil, Latin America, and the U.S. Contact: gustavo.oliveira@uci.edu Stergios Skaperdas, Professor, Economics and Director of the Center for Global Peace and Conflict Studies. His general area of research is political economy, the interaction of economics and politics. Among other issues, he has studied conflict and wars, the role of the modern state in economic development, and the interaction of globalization and geopolitics. Contact: sskaperd@uci.edu Etel Solingen, Distinguished Professor, Political Science and Thomas T. and Elizabeth C. Tierney Chair in Peace and Conflict Studies. Solingen studies the reciprocal influence between international political economy and international security, globalization and its discontents. She can discuss the crisis in terms of historical precedents (of international crises), the utility of sanctions, bargaining in crisis, Russia’s economic decline and how it bears on the current crisis. Contact: etel.solingen@uci.edu Media Contacts: • Tom Vasich, Communications Officer, UCI | 949-285-6455 | tmvasich@uci.edu • Heather Ashbach, Executive Director of Marketing and Communications, School of Social Sciences | 719-651-3224 | hashbach@uci.edu
It’s official — President Biden has selected Ketanji Brown Jackson as his nominee to the Supreme Court. If confirmed, she will the first Black woman to sit on the highest court in the nation. This is a momentous occasion for American history and reporters are clamoring to learn more. Our experts are ready with answers to help with your stories. Dr. Martha Ginn, professor of political science at Augusta University, is an expert on the judicial process, constitutional law and the U.S. Supreme Court. She discussed Jackson's credentials and the significance of her nomination. What is Ketanji Brown Jackson’s background and what credentials would bring to the Supreme Court? Why is she President Biden's top choice? President Biden made a campaign promise to nominate a Black woman to the SCOTUS if he had a vacancy to fill. While he had several strong contenders, Judge Brown Jackson is an obvious choice for many reasons. Like all current Justices, excluding Justice Barrett, Judge Brown Jackson has an Ivy League education. She has also clerked at the Supreme Court for Justice Breyer (whom she would replace). Interestingly, Justice Kavanaugh clerked for the Justice he replaced (Justice Kennedy) as well. Background and experience: Judge Brown Jackson was a federal district court judge for eight years (appointed by President Obama) and was just confirmed to the DC Court of Appeals last summer. The DC circuit court is seen as a training ground of sorts for Supreme Court Justices, as many nominees serve there first. What makes Judge Brown Jackson different is her experience as a public defender and then vice chairman of the sentencing commission. Bringing that experience to the Court will provide a much needed perspective on the rights of the accused. The Court recently heard a case regarding implementing the First Steps Act retroactively and it was apparent in the oral argument that some Justices did not appreciate the realities and complexities of sentencing in our criminal justice system. Judge Brown Jackson’s background will help fill that void. What does her appointment signify, seeing as she would be the first Black woman (but only third Black justice) in the history of the Supreme Court, as well as the first former public defender? Having four women on the Court at the same time will be important. More women than men attend law school now but the higher ranks of the profession are still male dominated, so having near parity in the nation’s highest Court is meaningful. Her race is also significant, since she will be only the third Black member of the Court and this would be the first time we have two Black members serving together. It’s likely she and Justice Thomas will be very different ideologically but regardless, demographic representation matters. More than ever the Supreme Court is deciding very controversial matters that impact everyone. Having a Court that represents all voices is significant in maintaining its legitimacy and making sure opposing viewpoints are considered in decision-making. With everything going on currently the nation and world, when do you project a vote will happen, and do you see it going through? Even with all that is going on in the world right now, this will be a top priority to the Democratic Party, particularly with President Biden’s low polling numbers and the upcoming midterm elections. With the slimmest of voting margins possible, the sooner the vote occurs, the better for the Democrats. The Republicans set the precedent with the Barrett nomination that the process can be done in weeks rather than the months taken in previous nominations. I anticipate the Democrats will follow that expedited model. It will be interesting to see if the three Republican senators who voted for her Court of Appeals appointment less than a year ago will oppose her nomination here. Justice Breyer conditioned his retirement on the successful appointment of his replacement. He intends to retire at the end of this year’s term (likely early July), so I would anticipate her confirmation vote by then at the latest. If you are a journalist covering this story, that’s where our experts on this topic can help. Dr. Martha Ginn, professor of political science at Augusta University, is an expert on the judicial process, constitutional law and the U.S. Supreme Court. Ginn is available to speak with media about this topic — simply click on her icon to arrange an interview today.
Operation Allies Welcome -- the official name for the American government's ongoing effort to assist vulnerable Afghans following the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan -- is the most significant U.S. resettlement effort since 1975. As of February 2022, some 65,000 Afghans have evacuated and settled in American communities. UConn School of Social work professors Kathryn Libal and Scott Harding have extensively studied the refugee resettlement process in America. In a recent essay for The Conversation, they detailed the resettlement process that refugees face -- and the challenges that individuals, families, agencies, and volunteers are enduring as the effort strains an already overburdened system. U.S. agencies brought in Afghans under humanitarian parole, rather than standard refugee procedures, because of the urgency of the evacuation. But the consequences may be profound. Some parolees had to wait weeks or months for the government or social service organizations to file paperwork granting them the right to work. Another challenge for parolees is securing family members’ admission to the U.S., which requires a high level of proof of threat to that particular individual. Many Afghan parolees should eventually qualify for asylum, but applying is a lengthy and complex process that generally requires significant legal assistance. More than 400,000 asylum cases are pending in the U.S. asylum system. Refugee resettlement organizations and voluntary groups that could normally help with filing asylum claims are already stretched thin. Evacuees’ advocates have called for approval of the Afghan Adjustment Act, which would allow Afghans to apply for lawful permanent resident status without waiting for the asylum system to rule on their cases or processing of special immigrant visa applications. Governors, businesses, celebrities, universities, military members, veterans and individuals across the U.S. have stepped in to support recent Afghan evacuees – many in locales with no history of resettling refugees. The responsibilities of resettlement, however, extend beyond helping evacuees in their first few weeks, to helping them secure a stable future. -- The Conversation, February 18, 2022 An associate professor of social work and human rights, Kathryn Libal is the director of UConn's Human Rights Institute and is an expert on human rights, refugee resettlement, and social welfare. She is available to speak with media – click on her icon now to arrange an interview.
Podcast: Germany’s caution over Russian aggression ‘disappointing’ NATO
Russia’s threat to Ukraine has highlighted differences between east and west Germans over handling of Russia, and the country’s cautious foreign policy Aston University academic explains why German soldiers shooting at Russian counterparts would be seen as a “tremendous failure” New Chancellor Olaf Scholz faces massive challenges including how to handle Covid-19, “crumbling” infrastructure, and climate change targets. Germany without its stalwart former leader Angela Merkel faces a number of huge challenges – not least the threat of Russia invading Ukraine. While Germany wants to provide leadership within the European Union, its diplomatic stance over Russia is at odds with many other countries within NATO. Those are the views of Dr Ed Turner, a reader in politics at Aston University, who was interviewed in the latest episode of the 'Society matters' podcast series, presented by journalist Steve Dyson. The episode, subtitled 'What Germany's new government means for the UK, Europe and Russia', follows a political shift following the departure of Chancellor Angela Merkel last year after 16 years in charge, after the defeat of her Christian Democratic Party. Dr Turner said the immediate priority for new Social Democrat Chancellor Olaf Scholz was “undoubtedly the crisis in Ukraine and the positioning of large numbers of Russian troops on Ukraine’s border, and the real worry that Russia will invade”. He said Germany wants the issue addressed, “but is doing so in a way that is really very cautious and is disappointing to many of Germany’s allies”. Dr Turner, who is also co-director of the Aston Centre for Europe, said Germany’s “very different approach” was reflective of its history with Russia. He explained: “There is a strong sense that Germany owes a significant debt, has a particular responsibility towards Russia for the losses incurred in World War One and, particularly, in World War Two. “The perception is that German troops once again firing at Russian soldiers would be a tremendous failure. Germany also places a strong emphasis on diplomacy as a way of engaging in foreign relations rather than hard military interventions.” There were also “economic angles”, he added, with Germany needing Russian energy at a time when it was committed to phasing out coal and nuclear power. Dr Turner, whose fascination with Germany began when he cycled through the country as a teenager, said a “carrot and stick” balance was dividing the country, with 68 per cent of west Germans but only 34 per cent of east Germans last year supporting EU sanctions against Russia. This reflected “really big disparities” more than 30 years after German reunification, with 60 per cent of east Germans feeling they are treated as second class citizens. Dr Turner said post-Merkel Germany faced big challenges including handling Covid-19, large parts of German infrastructure “really crumbling” with a big backlog of investment needed, and a pledge to move faster towards net zero emissions. But he added that UK-German relations in the wake of Brexit were not on the list of big things. “Good relations between the UK and Germany will depend on the nature of the UK’s relations with the European Union,” he said. “If the UK is at loggerheads with the European Union, in particular if there was a worsening of the situation in relation to the Northern Ireland protocol, then relations with Germany would get worse.” But Dr Turner said there was “huge affection” for the UK in Germany. “Germans are willing to disentangle the UK from Brexit and to say ‘we want to move on and don’t think badly of you’. I really want to see bridge-building between the two countries over the coming years.” Dr Turner said Germany remained “nervous” of the advance of the far right, especially if numbers of refugees coming to Germany were to grow. He said Angela Merkel would be remembered for Germany’s “humane response” to the 2015 refugee crisis, but others were “much more critical” over her policy. This, he added, led to German society becoming divided and the far right gaining ground. But Dr Turner acknowledged Mrs Merkel as a “remarkable leader who really broke the mould” as the first woman Chancellor and first from the east. In contrast, her successor is seen as a “steady hand on the tiller” as he heads a “traffic light coalition” of Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals. Episode 6 in series 2 of the ‘Society matters’ podcast and all previous episodes can be found HERE.