Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Downsizing: The Biggest Retirement Myth We Keep Repeating

I have a friend who announced she was downsizing the way some people announce a move to Tuscany. Lightness. Optimism. A touch of smugness. Six months later, she called me from her condo and whispered, “Sue… I think I bought a very expensive closet with a concierge.” Welcome to downsizing, the most celebrated, most recommended, and most wildly misunderstood retirement strategy in Canada. Like most things that sound simple, it works beautifully until you look a little closer. I spent a decade in the reverse mortgage industry watching this play out. Clients would come in — smart, capable, financially savvy people — who had spent years being told their retirement plan was simple: sell the big house, buy something smaller, pocket the difference, and ride off into the sunset. Many of them were sitting across from me because that plan had not worked the way anyone promised. The advice was decades old. Their lives were not. Two Retirees. Same Strategy. Completely Different Outcomes. Let me introduce you to Carol and Robert, whose stories say everything. Carol did everything right. She sold her long-time home, bought a sleek condo, freed up some equity, and checked every box on the “responsible retirement” list. On paper, it was a perfect move. In practice, she lost her community, her routines, her doctor, and a piece of her identity. She found herself sitting in a condo surrounded by unpacked boxes, wondering how a smart financial decision could feel so much like a personal loss. Robert also did everything right, but his story unfolded differently. He sold his home, moved closer to family, bought something smaller, and banked a meaningful sum. What he gained had very little to do with the numbers. He gained connection, belonging, and a life that felt fuller, not smaller. The strategy was identical. The outcomes were not. That is the uncomfortable truth about downsizing. It is not a formula. It is a life decision disguised as a financial one. The Downsizing Math People Love to Quote For decades, downsizing earned its reputation honestly. Retirement was shorter, often fifteen to twenty years. Pensions were stable. Housing was affordable. Families lived closer together. Selling your home and buying something smaller freed up real capital and meaningfully cut expenses. It was practical, logical, and often the right call. Fast forward to today, and almost none of those conditions still apply. Retirement now runs twenty-five to thirty-five years — a span longer than most people’s careers were when this advice was invented. Defined benefit pensions have largely become a public sector privilege. In the 1970s, 90% of private-sector workers with a workplace pension had a defined-benefit plan. Today, that figure has dropped to roughly 40%, and that’s only among the shrinking share who have any pension plan at all (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2025). Housing prices have surged far beyond income growth.  Real estate now accounts for over half of household wealth in Canada. Meanwhile, according to Statistics Canada, the average Canadian at sixty-five has approximately $272,000 in retirement savings, while estimates for a comfortable retirement often exceed $1 million. That is not a gap. That is a canyon. This gap turned the family home into something it was never designed to be. Not just a place to live, but a retirement plan. And once that shift happened, we collectively made a convenient assumption: the only way to access that wealth is to sell the house. That assumption is where things begin to unravel. The four assumptions that made downsizing work are no longer as reliable as they once were. 1. Smaller homes are cheaper. In many markets, the opposite is true. Smaller properties often command higher prices per square foot, and retirees now compete with first-time buyers and investors for the same limited inventory. That charming condo may cost nearly as much as the house you just sold. 2. Selling releases meaningful capital. Transaction costs alone can consume eight to twelve percent of the home’s value. Commissions, legal fees, land transfer taxes, moving costs, repairs. What looks like a windfall on paper can shrink dramatically before you ever see the money. 3. New home costs will be lower and more predictable. Condo fees, special assessments, and rising insurance costs tend to quietly escalate. What was supposed to simplify your financial life can quietly complicate it. 4. The process is straightforward. Market timing plays a much larger role than most people realize. Selling in a soft market while buying in a strong one can erode value on both sides. Downsizing is not just a financial decision. It is a transaction with real timing risk. When all four of these assumptions weaken at once, the outcome can be very different from what was promised. And yet, despite the evidence, the advice has not changed. We still tell people to “just downsize,” as though the calendar hasn’t moved since 1987. Nostalgia is not a strategy. The Part Nobody Puts in the Spreadsheet Here is what the financial projections consistently leave out: the emotional weight of this decision is enormous, and most people dramatically underestimate it. We are not talking about a slight reluctance to pack boxes. We are talking about the deep, visceral human attachment to home. The place where you raised your kids, hosted Thanksgiving, walked the dog, and knew every creak in every floorboard. The urge to age in place is powerful, primal, and not remotely irrational. And when we dismiss it with a spreadsheet, we are not being helpful. We are being reckless. And here is the harder truth: to make the numbers actually work, people often need to move two or three hours away into smaller communities where housing is genuinely cheaper. That means leaving your neighbourhood, your friends, your church, your yoga class, your doctor of twenty years, and your very carefully curated hairdresser. (Finding a new hairdresser in a rural town? That is not a life transition. That is a medical emergency.) Re-establishing a full support network in an unfamiliar community is daunting and exhausting work for anyone at any age. It often requires the senior to resume regular driving, something many are quietly hoping to scale back. And then there is healthcare. Access to specialists, familiar family physicians, and hospital services is non-negotiable for most people over sixty-five. It does not figure neatly into a spreadsheet, but it absolutely figures into the decision. I have never once met a senior who said, “You know what, I’m really glad I had to find a new GP at 72.” The urge to stay put almost always wins. Here is something worth sitting with: every older person knows what it is like to be young, but no young person knows what it is like to be old. That asymmetry matters enormously in this conversation. A well-meaning adult child running scenarios on a laptop has never felt the specific, irreplaceable comfort of a neighbourhood they have lived in for thirty years. Really listening — not just problem-solving — can bridge that gap. Because retirement is a family affair. And the families who navigate it best are the ones where everyone feels heard before anyone pulls out a spreadsheet. The Conversation That Actually Needs to Happen Financing retirement is not a binary choice. Downsize or don’t. That framing does everyone a disservice, and spoiler alert: the senior will almost always choose not to downsize. The real question is what happens next, because “stay put and hope for the best” is not a retirement plan. It’s a wish. The more useful conversation is about how to create cash flow while staying put. And that conversation is a minefield if you are not prepared. Here is the first obstacle: suggesting any kind of loan to finance retirement is a spectacular lead balloon. These are people who spent forty years lecturing their kids to pay off their mortgages and eliminate debt. Debt is the villain in their financial story. It is a bug, not a feature. So when you walk in and suggest that borrowing against their home might be the solution, their internal switchboard immediately puts that call on permanent hold. And if you mention a reverse mortgage? The Cybertruck of mortgages. The product everyone has an opinion about and almost no one fully understands. You will get one of two responses: the “talk to the hand” or the look usually reserved for the person who reheats leftover fish in the office microwave. Is some of that resistance rational? Absolutely. But is some of it just fear in a hat — old anxiety dressed up as financial principle? Also yes. This is why the key is to ask, not tell. The moment you lead with a product, you’ve lost the room. Lead with questions instead: • What are your actual cash flow needs? • How are you planning to meet them? • Are you carrying debt that is quietly strangling your monthly budget? • Do you need a lump sum, or do you need more reliable monthly income? The answers look very different, and they lead to very different solutions. If the goal is to free up monthly cash flow, paying off high-interest debt using home equity may deliver an immediate and meaningful result. A home equity line of credit can do that cleanly. If the goal is ongoing income, a reverse mortgage can provide tax-free monthly payments or a lump sum without requiring a move or a monthly repayment. If there is room on the property, a secondary suite or an addition can generate rental income and potentially add long-term value. For those comfortable thinking a few steps ahead, using a reverse mortgage or HELOC to purchase an annuity or a small rental property creates a stream of sustainable income that has nothing to do with square footage. None of these options shows up in the standard “should I downsize?” conversation. They should. The biggest financial mistake most retirees make is not the decision they choose. It’s the options they were never shown. Back to Carol and Robert Their outcomes were not the result of luck or timing. They were the result of alignment. Robert moved toward what he wanted. Carol moved away from what she felt she should. One decision created a sense of expansion. The other created a sense of loss. No spreadsheet captures that distinction. But it is the distinction that matters most. Downsizing is neither inherently good nor bad. It is simply a tool. When it is driven by clear goals, realistic assumptions, and an honest accounting of both the financial and emotional realities, it can be genuinely transformative. When it is driven by habit, pressure, or advice that stopped aging well some time ago, it tends to lead somewhere Carol knows well. So before you follow the script, pause long enough to ask a different question. Not “Should I downsize?” but “What do I actually need, and what are all the ways I can get there?” Retirement is not about having less space. It is about having more life. The right strategy is the one that gets you there without sacrificing everything that makes life worth living in the first place. Your community. Your doctor. Your Sunday routine. Your hairdresser who finally knows exactly what you mean by “just a trim.” Downsizing is a tool. Like a hammer. Enormously useful when you actually need a hammer. Spectacularly unhelpful when what you really need is a different plan.  The goal was never to end up with less. It was to end up with enough. Ask better questions. You’ll get better answers. And maybe keep your hairdresser’s number. Sue Don’t Retire…Re-Wire!!! My Book is Now Available for Pre-Order I hope you will consider pre-ordering a copy of Your Retirement Reset for you, a friend, or a loved one. It will be on store shelves on September 8, 2026 - You can now order on the ECW Press site here. And if you love supporting Canadian booksellers, please also check with your local independent bookstore.

Pope Leo XIV Faces Both Historic and Novel Challenges as He Enters the Second Year of His Papacy

In his first appearance on the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica, Pope Leo XIV shared with the world a message of hope, communion and reconciliation, emphasizing the need to “build bridges with dialogue and encounter so we can all be one people always in peace.” Throughout the last 12 months, the Pontiff has placed these values at the forefront of his work and ministry, pairing active collaboration with prayerful contemplation in his leadership of the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics. In the coming years, that emphasis is likely to continue, as the Pope addresses longstanding rifts and evolving challenges within the Church and beyond. Asked to consider the most striking aspects of his early papacy, and to reflect on the most pressing issues he currently faces, Villanova faculty members studying the pontificate had a wide variety of responses. Jaisy A. Joseph, PhD Assistant Professor of Theology and Religious Studies For Dr. Joseph, Pope Leo’s first year has been defined by a spiritual vision centered on unity, listening and shared responsibility. “From the beginning of his papacy, Leo emphasized that we are a synodal Church working towards peace and moving forward together. Leo’s Augustinian formation will absolutely leave its imprint on what Pope Francis started. While the two have distinct personalities and styles, there is a fundamental continuity with Francis that Leo has signaled. Leo stresses that at the core of the Church is a deeper desire for a spirituality of ‘we’—a Church rooted in deep listening and bold speaking. This is where the Augustinian charism makes itself known. “This unity does not erase differences. Instead, it asks, ‘How do we create friendships that are strong enough to bear the tensions of our differences?’ In a world shaped by ‘us versus them,’ Leo insists on recognizing Christ in the completely different ‘other.’ “Finally, his leadership style is marked by discernment. Listening is so critical to him, and any caution he displays is not out of fear but wanting to listen before speaking. In a noisy world, he insists that we just need silence—trusting that through shared listening, the Church can move forward together.” Luca Cottini, PhD Professor of Italian Studies For Dr. Cottini, Pope Leo’s first year has been marked by a clear effort to position the Church in active dialogue with the modern world—especially in response to emerging global challenges, migration and an increasingly interconnected faith community. He draws parallels to the priorities of Leo XIV’s namesake, Pope Leo XIII. “Catholic social doctrine is a doctrine that the Church established to address subjects that are not directly written about in the Gospel. This doctrine was important for Pope Leo XIII and is increasingly important for Leo XIV as well. ‘Leo’ is a name that relates back to Catholic social doctrine and the need to read the changing signs of the times. By choosing the name ‘Leo,’ the Pope signaled his desire to respond to contemporary issues. “Leo XIV has also harkened back to Leo XIII in his first year by viewing migration and immigration not as a plight, but rather as an opportunity to enter into contact with new worlds. This approach connects to Leo XIV’s own background and perspective, which includes both proximity to and distance from the United States, giving him both an outsider and insider perspective as well as a critical thinking lens on these issues. “Lastly, Leo XIV has used his first year to elevate this idea of a universal Church that is much needed, shaped by his global exposure and an ability to see the world through the lens of others. He sees that we can dialogue with the world, approaching modernity not as an enemy but as something to engage with.” Patrick McKinley Brennan, JD John F. Scarpa Chair in Catholic Legal Studies According to Professor Brennan, “One of the issues that is on the Pope’s radar and has been from before the conclave is the question of the traditional Latin Mass,” a cause championed by various cardinals, bishops, priests and lay faithful around the globe. As he shares, it is a matter of great interest to a small but growing number of Catholics who recall Pope Benedict XVI’s statement that the traditional Mass—the Mass as it was celebrated by most Catholics since 1570—was “never juridically abrogated” following the Second Vatican Council. “Pope John Paul II in the 1980s, and then Pope Benedict XVI in 2007, liberalized access around the world to the traditional Mass. But Pope Francis revoked most of those permissions, citing ‘facts’ that have subsequently been called into question by investigative journalists and others. Pope Francis issued a document called Traditionis custodes, which [went against] the permissions that Benedict XVI gave in a document called Summorum pontificum in July 2007. “Now, the leadership of the Society of St. Pius X [an anti-modernist priestly fraternity] have announced that they’re going to ordain new bishops, the exact thing that got some of their predecessors excommunicated in 1988, so that the traditional Mass can continue to be celebrated and other sacraments can continue to be provided to Catholics according to the traditional rites. Reading between the lines, I think the Society of St. Pius X is trying to force Pope Leo’s hand on the Latin Mass. He’s been biding his time, working out how to respond to this hard question, and I think they’ve just decided that it’s an all-or-nothing situation. “It’s an example of how Pope Leo inherited some big problems, and I think most of the cardinals who elected him thought that they had chosen someone who, because he can listen and is committed to unity, will try his very best to find a solution that remains faithful to Catholic doctrine while bringing in as many voices as possible. Ironically, Pope Francis reduced legitimate diversity in Catholic liturgy, and while Pope Leo has a chance to restore that diversity, he has to do so in a way that addresses the irregular situation of the Society of St. Pius X.” Ilia Delio, OSF, PhD Josephine C. Connelly Endowed Chair in Christian Theology Looking ahead, Sister Delio says one of the most significant social developments Pope Leo must face is the rise of advanced technologies—in particular, increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence models. “Our theological anthropology needs a bit of updating, as it does not currently meet the needs of our very complex world today. There are a lot of discussions on artificial intelligence and advanced technology, but the problem is that these technologies are already here and rapidly advancing. “So, we have to face this reality, not by asking ‘What is happening to us?’ but ‘What are we becoming with our technologies?’ and ‘How best can we remain human in an AI world?’ I think Pope Leo is asking similar questions, considering what makes the human person the image of God, what makes us distinct and whether there are human values that cannot be downloaded or reproduced in a digital medium. “At the same time, we must ask: Can technology deepen the human spirit by enabling a new level of collective life? Can AI technology empower the Body of Christ?” To speak with any of these faculty experts, please contact mediaexperts@villanova.edu.

Professor James Sample Provides National Commentary on Voting Rights, Key Supreme Court Cases

Professor James Sample of the Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University continued to serve as a prominent national commentator this month, appearing across ABC News, MS NOW (formerly MSNBC), SiriusXM, and Newsday to analyze fast-moving developments in election law, constitutional doctrine, and executive power. Across these appearances, Professor Sample focused on the evolving legal and practical implications of the SAVE America Act, including its potential burdens on married voters and broader access concerns. He also examined a series of high-stakes Supreme Court matters, including disputes over mail-in ballot deadlines and the constitutional debate surrounding birthright citizenship, offering insight into how the Court’s rulings could reshape election administration and individual rights. In addition, Professor Sample provided analysis of expanding presidential authority following the Court’s immunity ruling, situating current developments within a broader conversation about the scope and limits of executive power.

Study: Many pregnant women uncertain of marijuana risks even as use increases

Many pregnant women are unsure if it’s safe to use marijuana or products containing cannabidiol, an active compound in marijuana, even as they increasingly turn to them to combat morning sickness, anxiety or insomnia, a recent University of Florida Health study shows. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists advises against the use of marijuana and cannabidiol, or CBD, during pregnancy. Marijuana use has been associated in some studies with adverse fetal neurodevelopmental outcomes. Evidence of cannabidiol safety is sparse in human studies, but researchers remain concerned that it might nonetheless pose a danger. CBD is not intoxicating. The UF Health researchers said their study shows a need for the medical community to better educate women about the potential hazards to the fetus from using marijuana, also called cannabis. One worry is that some people believe the spreading legalization of marijuana or CBD around the nation equates to the government giving its stamp of approval that the products are safe, researchers said. Medical marijuana is legal in Florida, although its recreational use is not. “If a medication is legal, we assume that maybe it’s safe, although other things like tobacco and alcohol are also legal and we know that those can be harmful to pregnancies,” said Kay Roussos-Ross, M.D., the study’s senior author and a professor in the UF College of Medicine’s Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. “We see a good deal of data out there that shows that there is increased risk of psychiatric and behavioral issues related to marijuana use in pregnancy, but we need more,” she added. “We need more so that we can be correct in our assessments and our educational efforts to women of reproductive age who are using marijuana.” It’s difficult to quantify the rise of marijuana and CBD use during pregnancy, with most estimates showing an increase predating COVID-19. A 2021 federal survey reported 7.2% of pregnant women used marijuana. The UF Health study noted that emerging evidence from obstetrics care shows more pregnant women are trying the products, perhaps because of increased legalization. The study, published in Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids, surveyed 261 women and used focus groups to explore participants’ perceptions of the products. The women were either pregnant, breastfeeding or caring for a child 5 years old or younger, and reported use of marijuana or CBD products, such as vapes, smoking, tincture oils or ointments. “There seems to be a disconnect,” said Amie Goodin, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the UF College of Pharmacy’s Department of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy and the study’s lead author. “About one in six pregnant women are telling us, ‘Yes, I have used marijuana or a CBD product while I’m pregnant.’ But half are saying, ‘I don’t know what the risks are.’” About 40% of the pregnant women surveyed said they were unsure how risky it was to use marijuana once or twice a week during pregnancy, compared with 34.5% of women who were not pregnant when surveyed for the study but who had children. Asked the same question about CBD, more than 52% of pregnant women were unsure of the risk, compared with 41.8% for mothers who weren’t pregnant when surveyed. About 36% of pregnant women reported using marijuana, compared with 65% of mothers not currently pregnant, perhaps reflecting at least some increased caution among those in the former group. CBD use was 19.9% for pregnant women and 38.2% for women who were not pregnant. “Some women did mention that the legalization of marijuana has made marijuana more socially acceptable,” said study co-author Deepthi Varma, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the College of Public Health and Health Professions’ Department of Epidemiology. The researchers said they were especially concerned that women were even less sure of the safety of CBD use because it is widely available and often seen as harmless. “You might notice that it’s even something that you can buy at a gas station or a grocery store,” Goodin said. “CBD in a purified form has actually got an FDA approval to treat certain types of pediatric epilepsy on its own … but pharmaceutical-grade CBD is not quite the same thing as you would expect to get if you were purchasing CBD oil at a smoke shop or a gas station.”

AI gives rise to the cut and paste employee

Although AI tools can improve productivity, recent studies show that they too often intensify workloads instead of reducing them, in many cases even leading to cognitive overload and burnout. The University of Delaware's Saleem Mistry says this is creating employees who work harder, not smarter. Mistry, an associate professor of management in UD's Lerner College of Business & Economics, says his research confirms findings found in this Feb. 9, 2026 article in the Harvard Business Review. Driven by the misconception that AI is an accurate search engine rather than a predictive text tool, these "cut and paste" employees are using the applications to pump out deliverables in seconds just to keep up with increasing workloads. Mistry notes that this prioritization of speed over accuracy is happening at every level of the organization: • Junior staff: Blast out polished looking but unverified drafts. • Managers: Outsource their ability to deeply learn and critically think in order to summarize data, letting their analytical skills atrophy. • Power users: Build hidden, unapproved systems that bypass company oversight. A management problem, not a tech problem "When discussing this issue, I often hear leaders blame the technology. However, I believe that blaming the tech is missing the point; I see it as a failure of leadership," Mistry said. "When already overburdened employees who are constantly having to do more with less are handed vague mandates to just use AI without any training, they use it to look busy and produce volume-based work. Because many companies still reward the volume of work produced rather than the actual impact, employees naturally use these tools to generate slick but empty deliverables." "I believe that blaming the tech is missing the point; I see it as a failure of leadership. Because many companies still reward the volume of work produced rather than the actual impact, employees naturally use these tools to generate slick but empty deliverables." The real costs to organizations and incoming employees Mistry outlines three risks organizations face if they don’t intervene: 1. The workslop epidemic "These programs allow people to generate massive amounts of workslop, which is low-effort fluff that looks good but lacks substance. It takes seconds to create, but hours for someone else to decipher, fact-check, and fix," Mistry notes. "This drains money (up to $9 million annually for large companies) and destroys morale. As an educator, researcher, and a person brought into organizations to help fix problems, I for one do not want to be on the receiving end of a thoughtless, automated data dump, especially on tasks that require real skill and deep thinking." 2. Legal disaster He also states, "When the cut and paste mentality makes its way into professional submissions, the risks to the organization are real and oftentimes catastrophic. Courts have made it perfectly clear: ignorance is no excuse. If your name is on the document, you own the liability. Recently, attorneys have faced severe sanctions, hefty fines, and case dismissals for blindly submitting fake legal citations made up by computers." Click here for a list of cases. 3. A warning for incoming talent For new graduates entering this environment, Mistry offers a warning: Do not rely on AI to do your deep thinking. "If you simply use AI to blast out polished but unverified drafts, you become a replaceable 'cut and paste' employee," he says. “To truly stand out, new grads must prove they have the discernment to review, tweak, and challenge what the computer writes. The hiring edge is no longer just saying, 'I can do this task,' but 'I know how to leverage and correct AI to help me perform it.'" Four ideas to fix it To survive and indeed thrive with these new tools and avoid the unintended consequences of untrained staff, organizations should: 1. Reinforce the importance of fact-checking and editing: Adopt frameworks that teach employees how to show their work and log how they verified computer-generated facts. 2. Change the incentives: Stop rewarding busy work, useless reports, and massive slide decks. Evaluate employees on accuracy and results. 3. Eradicate superficial work: Don’t use automation to speed up ineffective legacy processes. Instead, use it to identify and eliminate them entirely. 4. Make time for editing: Give yourself and your employees the breathing room to actually review, tweak, and challenge what the computer writes instead of accepting the first draft. Mistry is available to discuss: Why AI is causing an epidemic of corporate "workslop" (and how to spot it). The leadership failure behind the "cut and paste" employee. How to rewrite corporate incentives to measure impact instead of volume in the AI era. Strategies for implementing safe, effective AI policies at work. How new college graduates can avoid the "workslop" trap in their first jobs. To reach Mistry directly and arrange an interview, visit his profile and click on the "contact" button. Interested reporters can also send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

Expert Insights: Environmental Risk in Times of Regulatory Change & Litigation Pressure

Environmental risks are becoming a central concern for organizations as regulations tighten, public expectations rise, and litigation related to environmental claims grows more common. Companies today must navigate a complex landscape where regulators, investors, and advocacy groups are paying closer attention to how environmental impacts are managed and reported. Recently, J.S. Held published the article, Environmental Claims and Disputes: Navigating Regulatory Change and Litigation Pressure, led by environmental risk and compliance expert Kimberly Logue Ortega. In this article, experts from J.S. Held share practical insights for insurance professionals and legal advisors on identifying environmental risks across industries and preparing for environmental disputes before they escalate. It examines how this increased scrutiny is creating new legal and financial pressures, particularly when organizations fail to comply with evolving regulations or when environmental claims made in public disclosures are challenged. A key issue is the growing focus on corporate environmental statements and sustainability reporting. Businesses face potential consequences whether they overstate environmental achievements, commonly referred to as “greenwashing" or avoid discussing them altogether. Without strong governance systems, clear internal oversight, and transparent reporting processes, organizations may expose themselves to regulatory penalties, legal disputes, and reputational damage. The article emphasizes that effective environmental governance is no longer simply a compliance exercise but an essential part of responsible corporate management. Kimberly Logue Ortega specializes in environmental risk and compliance. With over fifteen years of experience in the areas of environmental and natural resources law, Ms. Logue provides consulting and expert services for industrial facilities and law firms throughout the country. She has extensive experience with assessing and managing potential and ongoing compliance obligations. She routinely supports clients and media on rulemaking and legislative efforts focused on environmental and natural resources issues. View her profile As environmental regulations and stakeholder expectations continue to evolve, organizations that proactively strengthen their compliance frameworks and reporting practices will be better positioned to manage risk and build trust. The full report offers deeper insights into how companies can navigate regulatory change, reduce exposure to environmental claims, and develop stronger governance strategies in an increasingly complex landscape. To explore the topic further, simply connect with Kimberly through her icon below.

Julian Ku Analyzes International Law in Recent Media

Hofstra Law Professor Julian G. Ku has been featured in multiple news outlets, providing expert legal analysis on global issues and interpretations of international law. In a Newsweek article on China’s cancellation of flights to Japan, Prof. Ku provided commentary on how political pressures could play into fractious China-Japan relations. Prof. Ku also spoke with Dutch daily newspaper Trouw about China’s evolving vision of international law, explaining how Chinese leaders emphasize state sovereignty while downplaying human rights norms — a perspective that resonates in parts of the Global South. In Trouw, he described this selective approach as part of China’s broader effort to reshape the narrative around the postwar legal order. The Maurice A. Deane Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law at Hofstra Law and Faculty Director of International Programs, Prof. Ku teaches and writes on international and constitutional law.

Researchers warn of rise in AI-created non-consensual explicit images

A team of researchers, including Kevin Butler, Ph.D., a professor in the Department of Computer and Information Science and Engineering at the University of Florida, is sounding the alarm on a disturbing trend in artificial intelligence: the rapid rise of AI-generated sexually explicit images created without the subject’s consent. With funding from the National Science Foundation, Butler and colleagues from UF, Georgetown University and the University of Washington investigated a growing class of tools that allow users to generate realistic nude images from uploaded photos — tools that require little skill, cost virtually nothing and are largely unregulated. “Anybody can do this,” said Butler, director of the Florida Institute for Cybersecurity Research. “It’s done on the web, often anonymously, and there’s no meaningful enforcement of age or consent.” The team has coined the term SNEACI, short for synthetic non-consensual explicit AI-created imagery, to define this new category of abuse. The acronym, pronounced “sneaky,” highlights the secretive and deceptive nature of the practice. “SNEACI really typifies the fact that a lot of these are made without the knowledge of the potential victim and often in very sneaky ways,” said Patrick Traynor, a professor and associate chair of research in UF's Department of Computer and Information Science and Engineering and co-author of the paper. In their study, which will be presented at the upcoming USENIX Security Symposium this summer, the researchers conducted a systematic analysis of 20 AI “nudification” websites. These platforms allow users to upload an image, manipulate clothing, body shape and pose, and generate a sexually explicit photo — usually in seconds. Unlike traditional tools like Photoshop, these AI services remove nearly all barriers to entry, Butler said. “Photoshop requires skill, time and money,” he said. “These AI application websites are fast, cheap — from free to as little as six cents per image — and don’t require any expertise.” According to the team’s review, women are disproportionately targeted, but the technology can be used on anyone, including children. While the researchers did not test tools with images of minors due to legal and ethical constraints, they found “no technical safeguards preventing someone from doing so.” Only seven of the 20 sites they examined included terms of service that require image subjects to be over 18, and even fewer enforced any kind of user age verification. “Even when sites asked users to confirm they were over 18, there was no real validation,” Butler said. “It’s an unregulated environment.” The platforms operate with little transparency, using cryptocurrency for payments and hosting on mainstream cloud providers. Seven of the sites studied used Amazon Web Services, and 12 were supported by Cloudflare — legitimate services that inadvertently support these operations. “There’s a misconception that this kind of content lives on the dark web,” Butler said. “In reality, many of these tools are hosted on reputable platforms.” Butler’s team also found little to no information about how the sites store or use the generated images. “We couldn’t find out what the generators are doing with the images once they’re created” he said. “It doesn’t appear that any of this information is deleted.” High-profile cases have already brought attention to the issue. Celebrities such as Taylor Swift and Melania Trump have reportedly been victims of AI-generated non-consensual explicit images. Earlier this year, Trump voiced support for the Take It Down Act, which targets these types of abuses and was signed into law this week by President Donald Trump. But the impact extends beyond the famous. Butler cited a case in South Florida where a city councilwoman stepped down after fake explicit images of her — created using AI — were circulated online. “These images aren’t just created for amusement,” Butler said. “They’re used to embarrass, humiliate and even extort victims. The mental health toll can be devastating.” The researchers emphasized that the technology enabling these abuses was originally developed for beneficial purposes — such as enhancing computer vision or supporting academic research — and is often shared openly in the AI community. “There’s an emerging conversation in the machine learning community about whether some of these tools should be restricted,” Butler said. “We need to rethink how open-source technologies are shared and used.” Butler said the published paper — authored by student Cassidy Gibson, who was advised by Butler and Traynor and received her doctorate degree this month — is just the first step in their deeper investigation into the world of AI-powered nudification tools and an extension of the work they are doing at the Center for Privacy and Security for Marginalized Populations, or PRISM, an NSF-funded center housed at the UF Herbert Wertheim College of Engineering. Butler and Gibson recently met with U.S. Congresswoman Kat Cammack for a roundtable discussion on the growing spread of non-consensual imagery online. In a newsletter to constituents, Cammack, who serves on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, called the issue a major priority. She emphasized the need to understand how these images are created and their impact on the mental health of children, teens and adults, calling it “paramount to putting an end to this dangerous trend.” "As lawmakers take a closer look at these technologies, we want to give them technical insights that can help shape smarter regulation and push for more accountability from those involved," said Butler. “Our goal is to use our skills as cybersecurity researchers to address real-world problems and help people.”

From Sovereignty to Strategy: Cedarville's Resident Expert Explains the Global Stakes in the Greenland Controversy

As tensions escalate over the possibility of the United States seeking control of Greenland — including threats of annexation that have drawn international backlash — seasoned international relations expert Glen Duerr, Ph.D. offers critical context for journalists reporting on the diplomatic, legal, and geopolitical dimensions of this unfolding crisis. What's Happening In early 2026, high-level rhetoric from U.S. political figures has revived debates about Greenland’s status as a strategic territory. What began as discussions of acquisition has evolved into broad international concern over sovereignty, alliance cohesion, and Arctic security. Denmark and Greenland have reaffirmed their commitment to autonomy, while NATO allies and the European Union warn that any forceful move by the U.S. could undermine alliance unity and violate international norms — raising profound questions about territorial integrity, international law, and the politics of national interest. Dr. Glen Deurr's teaching and research interests include nationalism and secession, comparative politics, international relations theory, sports and politics, and Christianity and politics. View his profile here How Dr. Glen Duerr Can Help Journalists Cover This Story 1. Understanding Strategic National Interests Dr. Duerr’s expertise in international relations provides journalists with a framework to explain why Greenland has become such a focal point for U.S., European, and Arctic security policy — from its strategic location to its role in broader defense calculations. 2. Explaining Nationalism, Sovereignty & Self-Determination His research on nationalism and secession is especially relevant as Greenlanders and Danish authorities assert self-determination and reject external control, a central narrative in the current debate. 3. Contextualizing International Norms & Legal Constraints As commentators and policymakers discuss potential annexation, treaty obligations, and alliance commitments, Dr. Duerr can unpack how international law, treaties (such as NATO agreements), and norms against territorial conquest shape policy choices and diplomatic responses. 4. Making Sense of Geopolitical Fallout With European leaders labeling aggressive claims as a form of “new colonialism” and threatening economic countermeasures, Dr. Duerr can help journalists interpret how Greenland could become a flashpoint affecting transatlantic relations, alliance politics, and global perceptions of U.S. foreign policy. About Glen Duerr, Ph.D. Dr. Glen Duerr is a Professor of International Studies at Cedarville University with deep expertise in international relations theory, nationalism, secession, and comparative politics. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science and Government and is widely available to speak with media on geopolitics, sovereignty disputes, and the intersection of national interest and international order. Why This Matters The evolving crisis over Greenland is not merely a diplomatic dispute — it touches on fundamental questions of sovereignty, global strategic balance, alliance credibility, and international legal norms. Dr. Duerr is positioned to help journalists go beyond headlines, offering analysis that clarifies motivations, stakes, and implications for audiences tracking one of the most talked-about international issues of 2026.

Analyzing Legal Implications of Venezuela Intervention

Hofstra Law Professor James Sample has emerged as a leading legal analyst in national and regional media following the U.S. operation involving Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, offering expert commentary on constitutional authority, international law, and criminal procedure. Professor Sample appeared across major television, radio, and digital platforms, including ABC News, CBS New York, MS NOW, and Pacifica Radio, as developments unfolded surrounding the capture and federal prosecution. In multiple ABC News segments, Professor Sample analyzed the legality of the Venezuela operation under international law, characterizing the action as a potential violation of the United Nations Charter, and explained what to expect procedurally at the arraignment of Maduro and his wife on federal charges. His commentary also addressed the broader implications of asserting U.S. jurisdiction over a sitting foreign head of state.