Featured Post from Cedarville University

18 Years since 9/11 – Let an expert from Cedarville help with your coverage

Sep 10, 2019

2 min

It’s been 18 years since the attacks of 9/11 and that moment still occupies how this country approaches security, the military and foreign affairs.

Terrorism and attacks both home and abroad are still top of mind and Secretaries of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, Janet Napolitano, and Jeh Johnson were recently called to testify in Washington about the state of America’s readiness against terror attacks in the near two decades since September 11, 2001.

The changes to policy, legislation and how America approaches security have drastically altered how society functions either in plain sight (at airports) or behind the scenes (phone monitoring and cellular digital gathering). The ripple effects of 9/11 are still being felt and being debated by lawmakers at every level in Washington.

“Americans are still dealing with the aftermath of the post-9/11 world in other ways. The Trump administration is currently negotiating with the Taliban to end the 18-year war in Afghanistan, or at least to end the U.S. and NATO military presence there. A growing number of Democrats have called for the dismantling of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, just one of many agencies housed within the colossal and dysfunctional Department of Homeland Security, which was created in 2003. Congress is also set to decide whether to permanently reauthorize the National Security Agency’s moribund call-records program that began shortly after the September 11 attacks.” September 06 – New Republic

Are you a journalist covering domestic and international terrorism? Do you have questions about how ready, vulnerable or susceptible America is to another attack? What laws are needed and which policies need to be sun-setted now that so much time has passed.

Then that’s where our experts can help.

Dr. Glen Duerr's research interests include nationalism and secessionism, comparative politics, and international relations theory. Glen is available to speak to media regarding the state of America’s homeland security – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.

Connect with:

Glen Duerr, Ph.D.

Professor of International Studies

Dr. Deurr's research interests include nationalism and secession, comparative politics, and international relations theory

International TerrorismDomestic TerrorismInternational RelationsBrexit

Find Experts

Oct 26, 2026

1 min

Midterm Campaigns Enter Their Final Full Week

The final full week before the November 3 midterm elections is bringing a surge of campaign appearances, advertising and voter outreach as Republicans and Democrats compete for control of Congress. President Donald Trump and prominent Democratic leaders are campaigning across key states, while competitive races in places such as Mississippi illustrate how the political battleground has expanded. Republicans are defending their congressional majorities as Democrats seek to turn dissatisfaction with the administration into electoral gains. The stakes extend beyond which party wins the most seats. Congressional control helps determine which legislation advances, how federal spending priorities take shape and how closely lawmakers investigate executive branch decisions. Continued Republican control could help the president advance his agenda, while Democratic gains could create additional obstacles and strengthen congressional oversight. Voters are also choosing governors and other state officials whose decisions directly affect schools, public services and local economies. For campaigns, the closing days present a challenge: persuading undecided voters while ensuring existing supporters cast their ballots. For voters, the election offers an opportunity to evaluate both candidates’ promises and their ability to govern. The results will help shape the direction of national policy during the remaining two years of the president’s term.

Oct 14, 2026

1 min

Supreme Court Expansion Debate Raises Questions About Judicial Independence

Should the Supreme Court remain at nine justices, or would a larger bench strengthen the nation’s highest court? That question is drawing renewed attention after a Republican-backed constitutional amendment to permanently limit the court to nine seats failed in the House in September. Democratic proposals include expanding the court to 13 justices, while supporters and opponents disagree over whether changing its size would improve its credibility or deepen political divisions. Although nine justices may seem like a constitutional requirement, Congress determines the court’s size. Its membership changed several times before settling at nine in 1869. Legislation introduced by Rep. Al Green would increase that number to 13, reopening a debate over how much influence elected officials should have over the structure of the judiciary. Supporters see expansion as a way to restore balance and bring additional perspectives to the bench. Critics worry that adding seats to secure favorable rulings could encourage future majorities to pursue similar changes. The broader issue is how to preserve public confidence in an institution designed to exercise independent judgment. The Constitution’s protections for federal judges, including service during good behavior and protection against salary reductions, are intended to shield them from partisan pressure. Changing the court’s membership would create new opportunities for presidential appointments, with consequences that could extend well beyond a single administration. As the debate continues, Americans face a consequential question: What reforms would strengthen accountability while preserving the Supreme Court’s ability to interpret the law independently?

Oct 12, 2026

1 min

Inflation and Interest Rates Put Household Budgets and Business Plans Under Pressure

For American families, inflation is felt in everyday decisions: what to buy at the grocery store, how much to spend on gas and whether a major purchase can wait. This week’s Consumer Price Index report will bring those pressures into focus as the Federal Reserve considers its next interest-rate decision. Some officials have signaled that another increase could wait until December, but stronger inflation data could strengthen the case for action at the October 27–28 meeting. The stakes extend beyond the price of everyday necessities. Higher interest rates can make credit card balances and new auto loans more expensive, adding pressure to households already managing rising living costs. Homebuyers also face difficult affordability decisions, with the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate reaching 7.40% last week. Mortgage rates respond to bond markets and inflation expectations as well as monetary policy, meaning uncertainty can affect buyers even before the Fed acts. Businesses face a similar calculation. When financing becomes more expensive, purchasing equipment, expanding operations or hiring additional employees can become harder to justify. Rising operating costs can also force companies to choose between raising prices and accepting smaller profit margins. For policymakers, the challenge is to bring inflation under control while preserving employment and economic growth. This week’s report will offer another signal about that balance—and help shape the financial decisions families and businesses make in the months ahead.