Featured Post from Villanova University

Biden's Acts of Clemency Raise Awareness of the Power and Embolden Those Seeking a Second Chance, Villanova Law Professor Says

Jan 17, 2025

3 min

Just before the holiday season, as he entered his final month as President of the United States, Joe Biden announced that he would be granting clemency to roughly 1,500 American citizens. The clemency acts, which included sentence commutations for individuals placed on home confinement during the pandemic and pardons for 39 individuals with non-violent offenses, were touted by the administration as the most ever in a single day in modern history. A month later, on January 17, he commuted the sentences of roughly 2,500 individuals convicted of non-violent drug offenses, shattering December's mark and giving him the most pardons and commutations of any president in United States history.


The unprecedented size of the actions has been underscored throughout The White House’s press materials and has headlined most subsequent news coverage. But for Anton Robinson, JD, associate professor of law and director of Villanova’s Caritas Clemency Clinic in the Charles Widger School of Law, the importance of the clemency went far beyond the impressive scale.


“Acts like these bring much needed awareness to the clemency process, and to the epidemic of excessive sentencing in United States courtrooms,” Professor Robinson said. “At our clinic, we are already having people call to ask about opportunities for pardons and additional support for their cases.”


Public perception of presidential acts of clemency can, at times, be marred by partisan divisiveness. To some, these latest acts were overshadowed by President Biden’s earlier pardon of his son, Hunter, and eyes are already on incoming President Trump regarding how he might handle those charged in relation to the January 6 insurrection. Professor Robinson acknowledges that acts like these can cause people to “rightfully question the power that is being used,” but those are the outliers, not the norms, and steer the conversation away from the root purpose of clemency.


“People deserve a second chance,” Professor Robinson said. “There’s a tendency for system actors to focus primarily on the crime committed when considering whether a person’s sentence should be cut short. But many are different people today—sometimes decades later—than they were at the time of the crime’s commission.


“There is also no shortage of individuals in prison for whom a charge doesn’t tell the whole story. For example, a young person’s involvement in a crime, while sufficient for a legal conviction, might be weighed differently today, given increasing acceptance of scientific research on the portion of the human brain which controls decision-making, impulse control and executive function. Research shows all of that continues to develop well into adulthood.”


Determining who fits the criteria for clemency, Professor Robinson says, is not always easy to do. Collecting records of good behavior that illustrate change while in a carceral setting is much more difficult than collecting records of bad behavior. That’s why entities like the Caritas Clemency Clinic, in which Villanova Law students work directly on behalf of such clients under Professor Robinson’s guidance, spend so much time talking to anyone who has had a relationship with the incarcerated person.


“What we often find is that despite being incarcerated and having very little given opportunity, these individuals make their own opportunities to build community and rich relationships and try their best to contribute to society in a positive way,” Professor Robinson said.


A military veteran who helped church members in poor health perform tasks. A nurse who spearheaded COVID vaccination efforts and natural disaster response. A counselor who helps guide youth away from destructive behavior and involvement with gangs. Those are the types of actions Professor Robinson references, all of which were highlighted specifically in the White House’s fact sheet for President Biden's December acts, just before the words “The United States is a nation of second chances.”


“I'm hoping that these large acts of clemency encourage folks to think, ‘Hey, what about my loved one? What about me? I am a completely different person than I was 20 years ago, what can I do to try to secure my freedom and my ability to live the life that I've missed out on?’” Professor Robinson said. “It really is a great opportunity to remind ourselves that people are far better than the worst things that they've ever done, and that we have an opportunity to acknowledge that as a society and to encourage more of this action, both on a federal and state level.”


You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Villanova University

3 min

Villanova Professor Sees Costs and Benefits in Corporate and Federal Return-to-Office Mandates

In early February, federal agencies submitted plans in accordance with an executive order to initiate an estimated 1 million government employees’ full-time return to their duty stations. The departments’ actions are among the latest in a series of RTO moves enacted since the start of 2025. Notably, they follow policy changes by corporate giants Amazon, AT&T and JPMorgan, who in January began requiring five days of in-person work for select staffers, with justifications ranging from strengthening culture to improving performance. With more employers expected to require in-office work in the coming months, some predict that 2025 could be the “year of the RTO mandate.” But, given the arguments from those pushing for these policies, it’s worth asking: Are these return-to-office requirements truly justified? Do they actually improve communication, strengthen teams and boost productivity, as supporters claim? According to Kyoung Yong Kim, PhD, whose research focuses on telework, strategic human capital management and employee-organization relationships, the answer is complicated—and highly circumstantial. Dr. Kim says that, by gathering coworkers around the proverbial water cooler, RTO policies can in some cases facilitate dialogue, promote teambuilding and foster organizational success. Yet, in other instances, work-from-home (WFH) arrangements can significantly boost employee morale, efficiency and output. “In a recent paper, my colleague Ijeoma Ugwuanyi [a professor at Hong Kong Metropolitan University] and I examined how social distancing initiatives, which reduce interactions among people, impact working relationships,” says Dr. Kim. “We found that they can actually help improve negative ones, at least in employees’ minds.” Analyzing data collected on 105 working relationships among 43 full-time personnel at a South Korean healthcare company, Dr. Kim and Dr. Ugwuanyi discovered that, when afforded extended WFH privileges, colleagues previously at odds were given the space necessary to reassess their outlooks and improve their dynamics—especially when the individuals involved were viewed as competent and warm. As a result, these repaired relationships generally empowered more effective collaboration in the long run. Additionally, employees with positive in-person relationships maintained a solid rapport even when geographically apart. “These findings are particularly relevant as corporate and government workers increasingly return to their offices,” says Dr. Kim. “Managers need to remember that, according to the research, employees are willing to reset negative relationships they had previously. That said, returning to the office also offers a chance to strengthen relationships and make them more positive, which is crucial since team dynamics are a key determinant of team performance.” Per Dr. Kim, in order to best position themselves for success on the RTO front, organizations need to take a measured, sympathetic approach in facilitating their in-office policies, with an eye toward mitigating negativity. They need to remain cognizant of the logistical and interpersonal challenges that could emerge in the wake of a return, address their employees’ concerns in an attentive manner and foster a “supportive climate characterized by supportive behaviors.” It’s a situation that Dr. Kim says bears parallels—perhaps somewhat counterintuitively—to the mass shift to telework that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. As he found in his research on that phenomenon, employees responded best to changes in their working arrangements when organizational leaders and managers took the time to explain and actively discuss the reasoning behind them, especially in mission-driven terms. “Essentially, an important implication of the findings is that, to sustain employees’ positive attitudes and behaviors, it is crucial to frame these moves in a way that highlights how working in the office benefits both employees and the organization,” says Dr. Kim. In turn, RTO-focused organizations should recognize that their words and messages have a very real impact, particularly when scrutinized by workers who may not be happy about resuming their morning commutes. “Amazon, for instance, appears to be taking a thoughtful approach by emphasizing the value of collaboration with colleagues and the enrichment of organizational culture,” says Dr. Kim. “One potential drawback, however, lies in their message about the consequences of non-compliance, specifically that failure to adhere to the in-office policy could jeopardize employees’ chances of promotion. “A more positive framing, emphasizing how such policies support professional growth as well as employees’ well-being, could enhance favorable perceptions and work behaviors.” In the event organizations remain attuned to such situations—taking their employees’ perspectives into account, actively communicating their intentions and presenting clear value propositions—Dr. Kim thinks a year of the RTO mandate could potentially be a less daunting prospect. And maybe, with time, the transition back from Zoom to the boardroom could be a beneficial one.

5 min

Application of Road Salt Can Have Widespread and Long-Lasting Impacts, Says Villanova’s Steven Goldsmith, PhD

Streaks of white that coat roads and cars. Powdery footprints smudged into floors. It’s the time of year when much of the United States relies on road salt to keep ice at bay and accepts the nuisances that come with it. But beyond the inconvenience, all that salt has potentially serious, long-term effects on the environment, human health and infrastructure. Steven Goldsmith, PhD, an associate professor of Geography and the Environment at Villanova University, researches topics in watershed biogeochemistry and environmental health. A focus of his lab is the study of de-icing practices on water quality. Recently, Dr. Goldsmith shared insights from his work, exploring the widespread consequences of road salt and potential solutions to reduce its harm. Villanova PR: You have led or participated in research focused on the environmental impacts of road salt application, often locally, but with much broader implications. What have some of those studies found? Steve Goldsmith: In 2022, we published a paper showing that salt—sodium in particular—is seeping into Philadelphia's water supply, and it's timed with snow melts. We found that if you drank a glass of tap water during the peak period in the winter of 2018-19, your sodium intake would be six times what the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends within a glass of water for someone on a low-sodium diet. We are susceptible in this region because most of our water supply comes from rivers, and the rivers receive that salt runoff. Some of our findings indicate this is a chronic issue and not limited to winter months. All that contaminated shallow groundwater causes the concentration to rise year-round, even in the summer. In a recent paper, we discuss the issue of salt that lands on the side of the road. When it does, it infiltrates into soil, and then it goes into shallow groundwater before entering our streams. Oftentimes when salt is applied to the road and you receive that initial precipitation, you are left with runoff with salinity near the concentration of sea water, which is very bad for freshwater organisms. PR: Have those studies found other impacts beyond those created directly by sodium? SG: It’s certainly not just a sodium issue—it's also a chloride issue. Chloride does have a negative impact on aquatic organisms, but it can also corrode drinking water infrastructure. If you have lead pipes in that infrastructure, that can lead to a range of human health issues. Even just to prevent those problems, applying chemicals to protect from the corrosion of pipes increases costs. Perhaps the worst part is when road salt infiltrates shallow soil and groundwater, the sodium is left behind preferentially in soils because it's displacing other positively charged elements, which could then go into groundwater. The elements it replaces are metals. If we have more salt runoff on the side of the roads, chances are, if we look in those streams, we are going to see higher concentrations of heavy metals like copper, zinc and even lead. PR: You have mentioned the efficacy of brine. What is brine and why is it more effective than traditional road salt? SG: If you’ve ever driven behind a rock salt truck, you probably noticed it pelts your windshield and shoots salt everywhere. A lot of that rock salt ends up following the natural trajectory of the road, which is designed to drain towards the sides to keep water from pooling. As soon as a snowstorm happens, it's going to melt and flow into the storm drain. That, of course, is bad for the environment, but also doesn’t help remove ice from the road. With brine, the application is a diluted road salt with water mixture that is usually about 23 percent sodium chloride by volume, and it’s referred to as an “anti-icing” measure. The saltwater infiltrates the top layer of pavement and embeds in the roadway itself, which keeps ice from crystallizing when snow or water hits the surface. To use an analogy, let’s say you have a large rock that you placed on top of the pavement, but you also have a quarter of that rock’s volume in sand. If you put that sand onto the pavement, it will permeate into nooks and crannies. That's the same idea here: use less material and in a way that makes it stick better to the surface and reduces the need to reapply as often during and after storms. PR: What are potential positive impacts if municipalities switch from road salt to brine? SG: There are limited studies on this, but it's been shown that if done properly, brining can reduce salt runoff into streams by anywhere from 23 to 40 percent. If it's 40 percent, you have almost cut the problem in half, and that lower peak salt concentration and runoff would have a profound positive impact on aquatic organisms that are downstream. From a cost standpoint—and I say this theoretically because there are other up-front costs associated with brining at the municipal level—if you reduce salt concentrations by up to 40 percent it means you apply a lot less and therefore spend a lot less. PR: What can individuals do to decrease road salt runoff, and how much of an impact does individual use have? SG: We can start by addressing the household salt application problem. Another one of our recent papers suggests that other impervious surfaces, like driveways, sidewalks and parking lots, are probably contributing even more than the roadway application. The best estimate is that individual or private contractor use could be over 10 times what you see on roads. For researchers, part of addressing this is trying to understand why people apply so much salt on their personal properties: are they afraid of lawsuits? Keeping with the Joneses? Are they not aware of ordinances that say you have to shovel within a certain number of hours, which would negate the need for salt anyway? For homeowners and other individuals, one proposed solution is to use a coffee mug’s worth of salt for every 10 sidewalk squares. Think of it as a “low-sodium diet” to make sure you’re not overapplying. It’s a way we can limit our use of salt and do so in a way that doesn't jeopardize safety. These individuals can also sweep up salt applied before a storm that never materialized to use before the next one. This will prevent the possibility of rain needlessly dissolving the salt. PR: Are there effective alternatives to road salt that individuals can use? SG: The only truly effective alternative, unfortunately, is simply using less road salt. While some people apply sand, it also washes into local streams, causing environmental harm. Another option that has gained attention is beet juice—what I like to call the “Dwight Schrute” solution. Beet juice actually works better than road salt because its organic acids prevent ice from crystallizing at temperatures much lower than those at which rock salt is effective. However, from an environmental standpoint, beet juice contains high levels of nutrients, which can contribute to algae growth if it enters waterways. Additionally, recent studies suggest it may also be toxic to aquatic organisms. The growing consensus is that while some road salt is necessary, we need to use less of it.

4 min

Villanova Nursing Professor Addresses Overlooked Roles in Mental Health Care

Mental health crises, such as suicidal ideations or attempts, present profound challenges, not only for the individuals experiencing them, but also for the families and professionals who provide care. Parents, in particular, often find themselves stepping into the role of a primary healthcare provider when a child returns home from mental health inpatient treatment. Guy Weissinger, PhD, MPhil, RN, the Diane Foley Parrett Endowed Assistant Professor of Nursing at Villanova University’s M. Louise Fitzpatrick College of Nursing, explores the complex challenges parents face during these delicate situations and how the healthcare system can better prepare them for these responsibilities. Dr. Weissinger’s research also emphasizes the need to rethink how educators train and support healthcare providers involved in mental health care and suicide prevention. In a recent conversation, Dr. Weissinger shared insights into his research, the unique roles that parents and nurses have in managing mental health crises and the steps needed to create a more holistic and inclusive approach to care. Q: A large part of your research examines the parents of youth who are experiencing mental health crises. What challenges do parents face when tasked with providing ongoing healthcare for their children who might be facing these issues? Dr. Weissinger: There’s been a lot of recent work looking at how parents can be better supported in any kind of health crisis as their child is experiencing it. At the end of the day, a physician, therapist or nurse practitioner (NP) can support a patient with their clinical expertise in the hospital, but when those patients return home, the responsibility most often falls on the parent to continue that care. If we're then requiring parents to act as case managers and healthcare providers for their children, how can we best equip them to fill those roles? Q: How does a parent’s role in managing a child’s mental health crisis differ from the roles of a physician or therapist? Dr. Weissinger: I studied family intervention science, which looks at both the individual and family processes that may be related to adolescent suicide risk or any other mental health concern, so I like to ask the question: what is this person's role in their family system? Parents oftentimes have a particular role in the family system, and when there's any kind of mental health crisis, that role may have to change: how they act, what tasks they perform, etc. I’m studying the role transition of a parent during a suicide crisis—what are their struggles and what are parents identifying as their big needs? I’m finding that a lot of parents are feeling really alone or shameful in some way, and then they’re using their own money, time or social resources to try to provide care for their child. This often happens because they feel like the mental health system is not providing the support they need to take on that role, so they’re trying to figure out what to do on their own. Q: An additional part of your research surrounds the role of a nurse practitioner in suicide crises. What are some of the findings from your recent research with nurse practitioners (NPs) about their suicide prevention education? Dr. Weissinger: The findings, which will soon be published, are really interesting because they’re very mixed. I went out and asked NPs what they were taught about suicide prevention and when they were taught it as part of their education and training. Some said that their primary care education integrated suicide prevention as a focus of the curriculum. Others mentioned that they didn’t learn about it in their undergraduate or master’s programs, but they’re still expected to know about suicide prevention as part of their job responsibilities. It’s important to highlight these discrepancies and how we need to think about adapting nursing education to include these important topics. Q: What are some of the overlooked responsibilities and challenges of nurses in managing adolescent mental health? Dr. Weissinger: A large percentage of primary care visits are currently conducted by nurse practitioners, and now suicide screenings are expected to be a standard of practice in primary care visits, even though some NPs don't have that specific training. NPs are often left out of consideration and conversation around best practices related to suicide prevention, so we need to make sure that anyone who's conducting these screenings surrounding suicide has the training and the preparation to do so. It's a difficult conversation for NPs to have, especially when they’re working with kids and families. Q: Why is suicide prevention important to study from a nursing lens? Dr. Weissinger: So much mental health research lumps together groups or only studies psychologists and physicians, so a lot of people who provide mental health services or do suicide prevention screenings are left out of these studies. For example, nurses provide a majority of the discharge education on what parents are expected to do at home when a child leaves the hospital—whether that’s administering injections for a child with diabetes or making a house safer for preventing self-harm. Most of the time, a nurse is walking parents through next steps, answering questions and checking in on patient progress. It’s not the psychologists who evaluated the child, or the physicians who decided that the individual needed to be inpatient, it’s the nurses who are providing those points of contact. Q: What do you hope is the main takeaway from your work surrounding mental health and suicide crises? Dr. Weissinger: Suicide is a really complex thing to address, and it needs to be a conversation that isn’t looking for a silver bullet. It’s a conversation that asks the questions: how do we improve the mental health care system? How do we get primary care providers trained and involved in these discussions? How do we best prepare family members to support individuals who are struggling? Not all researchers need to work on every part of this, but it needs to be a total, all-encompassing effort.

View all posts
Powered by