Ken Pontarelli ’92 credits the University for changing his life, opening up opportunities to pursue his passions and achieve professional success that allows him to focus on the public good. In return, he and his wife, Tracey, are paying it forward by supporting Syracuse students pursuing meaningful careers in the vital field of sustainability. Their recent gift endows the Pontarelli Professorship in the . It builds on their years of support that have helped position the University as a thought leader in sustainability. As part of the Forever Orange Faculty Excellence Program, the University has committed additional funds to support teaching and research activities in environmental sustainability, finance and public policy.

“Our goal is to build a sustainability program that ties together distinctive strengths from across the University, allowing business, policy and environmental science to work together to solve problems and tackle global challenges,” says Pontarelli. They are well on their way, thanks to previous support from the Pontarellis that a five-year funded professorship in 2019 and a scholarship fund in the , and helped create a unique master of science joint degree from the Maxwell and Whitman schools in sustainable organizations and policy, and the .

“When I (in 2022), Syracuse University was ranked No. 11 nationally for environmental policy and management by U.S. News & World Report,” says Jay Golden, Pontarelli Professor of Environmental Sustainability and Finance. “Each year our rankings have increased, and the most recent 2024 rankings have us tied with Harvard for No. 6. Certainly, our goal is to continue to rise in the rankings through the recognition of our peers of all the great programs we have going on at Maxwell and the other colleges at Syracuse.”

Growing Interest in Sustainability

Pontarelli graduated from the University with a bachelor of science in finance from the Whitman School and in economics from the Maxwell School. He immediately began what became a long career at Goldman Sachs, initially focusing on energy markets. “We made one of the first large-scale investments into renewable power back when few such investments were being made,” says Pontarelli. “As I gained more understanding of the field, I realized how critical private capital is, together with government policy, in addressing environmental issues. The business case for investing in sustainability is incredibly strong.”

In an interview with Private Equity International (November 2023), Pontarelli pointed out that sustainability was just a niche market with $20 billion of assets under management just 10 years ago and ballooned over the decade to more than $270 billion of assets under management.

At Goldman Sachs, where Pontarelli is partner and managing director, he leads the firm’s private equity impact investing efforts within the Asset Management Division. He was appointed to the University’s Board of Trustees in 2021, serves on the Whitman Advisory Council and, last year, was awarded the for Sustainability by Maxwell. His investments in academic and experiential programs are designed to ensure that environmental policy research is well-grounded in an understanding of markets and financial mechanisms.

“This is a pivotal time,” says Pontarelli. “There are so many things that could be done if we don’t get caught up in political issues. Everyone would agree that these are common sense business things to do.” He cites the example of one recent investment in a company that provides control panels to big data centers to manage power generation usage. The product can reduce usage by 10% for the average data center. “I’m focused on pragmatic solutions.”

That’s why Pontarelli is so impressed with the work being done by students in the which, according to Golden, is “a nonpartisan think tank and research lab focused on examining sustainability imperatives at the nexus of industry and government.” The lab launched in 2021 with just six students.

“From that early start we have maintained every semester 40 to 50 paid undergraduate and graduate sustainability research fellows spanning almost every college across the University,” Golden says. “In fact, we have more students interested than we can currently financially support or mentor with our current staffing levels. Not a week goes by that I don’t receive numerous emails from students interested in joining the lab.”

Inspiring More Philanthropic Support

It’s easy to see why students are so interested. They are doing what Pontarelli calls “eye-popping work” in partnership with industry or government, and he hopes to inspire more philanthropic support so that more students can participate. Golden cites a few examples:

• Students from the Maxwell School, Whitman School and are doing research in energy systems, biotechnologies and carbon capture technologies for various industrial sectors. This includes providing technical, finance and policy insights to develop recommendations for government agencies, policymakers and business leaders that would benefit the U.S. economy and the environment.
• Students are working with Thomson Reuters as well as the global footwear and apparel industries researching innovative best management practices and policies that can eliminate the utilization of forced labor in the global supply chain.
• A team led by Golden and School of Architecture Assistant Professor Nina Wilson is working with architects, engineers, design/build firms, insurance, government and finance on developing innovative strategies, policies and professional practices for resiliency in the built environment.��They are holding workshops throughout New York state.
• Students have developed an energy dashboard to quantify and visualize energy consumption on campus, by buildings and by energy source, that is continuously updated while also modeling economic impacts and opportunities for the University to manage energy consumption and other environmental impacts. This also involves working with Campus Dining to quantify food wastes across the campus and modeling the economic and greenhouse gas opportunities by implementing new strategies.

Preparing Future Leaders for the Public Good

The new joint master’s degree from Maxwell and Whitman, supported by the Pontarellis and directed by Golden, offers an intensive professional sustainability consulting course each spring through the lab, in which students work in project teams to provide high-level research and consulting to public and private organizations, including Fortune 500 global companies and smaller start-ups domestically and globally.

“I am grateful to Ken and Tracey for continuing to promote the values of high-quality teaching, experiential learning, evidence-based research, engaged citizenship and public service impact, which we hold dear at the Maxwell School,” says Dean David M. Van Slyke. “This professorship, endowed in their name, will make certain their commitment to climate, energy and environmental sustainability and working across levels of government and sectors of the economy continues to be a hallmark of the instruction and scholarship the Maxwell School pursues in preparing future leaders that seek to promote the public good.”

Golden says that “we have an incredible job placement rate for students even before they graduate” with organizations as diverse as Morgan Stanley, KPMG, the State of New York and the Department of Defense. “They stand out in the job market because they have learned to take theory from the classroom and apply it in the real world, with plenty of opportunities to do the work thanks to Ken and Tracey Pontarelli,” Golden says.

“We want students to get excited about careers in the sustainability field,” Pontarelli says. “It’s purposeful, meaningful work as they become problem-solvers who can change the world.”

Syracuse University continues to monitor weather conditions pertaining to the Lake Effect Snow Warning and Cold Weather Warning currently in effect. This includes reviewing the most up-to-date National Weather Service data and forecasting, and consulting with an independent meteorologist about what to expect.

Based on current conditions, the University expects to remain open and operational today.

Please note: Syracuse University recognizes that while it rarely closes for inclement weather, individuals, many of whom travel to campus from outside the City of Syracuse, must take precautions and use good judgment when determining whether to travel to campus. Faculty, graduate students who teach courses, and staff concerned about their commute should contact their department chair or supervisor, respectively, to coordinate alternative work arrangements. Similarly, students commuting to campus should contact their professors if they have concerns about travel conditions from their residence.

Any change in the University’s operating status will be announced via the University’s emergency broadcast notification system and will carry the notice SU WEATHER ALERT. Please be sure your Orange Alert settings are always up to date in MySlice.

SU WEATHER ALERT information will be announced via the following communications channels:

• via text message;
• via a “crawl” on campus TV monitors and University websites;
• on X: and ;
• on Facebook: and ;
• on news.syr.edu and ; and
• via Syracuse University public radio station and other local media outlets.

Only Syracuse University’s Internal Communications and Media Relations teams are authorized to transmit to the news media and the campus community announcements about closings, work-schedule changes or class-start delays.

In disability advocacy circles, the has gained a national reputation as one of the most progressive cities in the U.S. for incorporating the ideas and feedback of users with disabilities when creating new handicapped-accessible spaces, according to two prominent disability advocates.

, Baylor University professor of physical therapy and founder of mobility design studio , and , founder of the and a fellow, point to the work on and the adaptive design circles here as a model for other communities to follow.

The Creekwalk is a 4.8-mile paved pathway that runs from the Southside neighborhood to . When city planners and engineers decided to make accessibility a major focus of the Creekwalk, they tapped into local individuals with a range of backgrounds—medical and social model disability advocates, inclusive design experts, students at and local individuals with disabilities. , a city facilities engineer, and , City of Syracuse deputy commissioner of planning and sustainability, first invited local resident to provide a first-person perspective on the plans. McGough, a quadriplegic as the result of an accident��at age 21, is the program coordinator at ARISE Inc., a local independent living center.

The project soon drew in others McGough knew: faculty members , professor of industrial and interaction design, and , professor and coordinator of the , who are both ARISE volunteers.

Also joining the group were Upstate Medical University developmental pediatrician and staff members from the , an inclusive preschool in Syracuse. Galloway and Truesdell were aware of the initiative through their involvement with the adaptive design community here.

Carr involved School of Design master’s students because he recognized how the project presented an exceptional opportunity to learn inclusive design via a “living laboratory” at a site adjacent to their class space. He also knew the project supported key University goals for students: experiential learning; community-engaged scholarship; enhanced awareness of diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility; and a commitment to human thriving.

The city’s project leaders welcomed student involvement, Houck says. “These projects are something we’ve collaborated on with Don Carr and with other organizations in the community. Our projects are better for it, and it’s wonderful we can have that resource. Carr is raising the profile of the work that’s being done and it’s great that he’s involving his students in these efforts.”

Kerney agrees. “Whether it’s the first fully inclusive and accessible playground, our sidewalks, our recreational amenities, boat launches or trails that are available to all users, increasing access is an important part of serving the entire community. It’s something Mayor Walsh and the whole administration has prioritized,” he says. “The city has a responsibility to serve everybody, and these types of improvements do just that.”

The User View

The student designers began determining how to create a practical experience at the Inner Harbor site based on the disability community maxim, “Nothing about us without us is for us.” Their first step: borrowing a wheelchair to look at the pathway from a disabled user’s perspective.

They digitally mapped the entire Creekwalk path, then started ideating. One student created a video game to familiarize users with the trail virtually before they visit. Another made an app that offers information about all pathway features. A third designed an accessible interactive information kiosk housing electrical ports to recharge electric wheelchairs. Others created an animation of the trail that featured a series of accessible kiosks, each equipped with a joystick controller for those with limited dexterity.

Amaan Khan ’23, a student who worked on that project and who is now a product and branding designer, said the class with Carr was “an absolute pleasure. It taught us that even though societal paradigms are shifting toward inclusivity, we must unlearn many of our ways to better connect people with disabilities to the facilities that already exist. Doing that can unite people and guide them forward as a collaborative community.”

McGough says he welcomed the chance to offer ideas based on his lived experience. “I was excited that they listened to my feedback and wanted to follow up on it, and that they were open to suggestions about accessibility in the community spaces,” he says.

McGough was able to try the kayak launch last fall. It’s built so someone can comfortably transfer into and out of a boat via a bench, pull bars, hoists and a gradual rolling launch system. “I was so excited about this project. Getting out in the boat is such a great experience, getting some sun, being around water and nature, having some exercise and recreation,” McGough says. “It’s really freeing because once the boat is in motion, it’s all me making it happen. It’s a really nice thing to have when a lot of the time you require assistance from other people and aren’t able to feel so independent.”

Three Phases

The project has three access points—the kayak launch at the Inner Harbor and a wheelchair-accessible waterside access ramp at Kirk Park have been built. An access/launch point at Dorwin Avenue is planned as part of the third phase of the Creekwalk trail that is now under design.

A $70,000 grant from the Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration program supported the Inner Harbor site, and $380,000 from the Honeywell remediation settlement, for improvements connected to Onondaga Lake, was used for the more extensive construction at Kirk Park. The city continues to apply for grants for ongoing accessibility projects.

A Model Partnership

Working together came naturally to this group, so it’s unlikely they were aware of the “ripple effect” of their cooperation. Fathers believes the city’s openness to including disabled users from the start, the involvement of interested supporters and the inclusion of University faculty and students in the project helped the group gel. “The way the group came together was kind of an organic thing—because disabled people, designers and clinicians began working together in a matter of hours,” he says.

Fathers tells how Truesdell, who was involved in Syracuse’s adaptive design collaboration, referenced that coalescing as “the Syracuse effect”—something she said she had not seen previously in her experience, he says. “She means that in Syracuse, it’s very easy to connect to people with disabilities, their advocates, their families and designers in a way that she hasn’t seen in any other place. It’s all about the people here. She said it was a very powerful thing to observe,” Fathers says.

Galloway says the collective advocacy spirit here “is particularly rare. It’s a model the world needs to come here to look at to see what Syracuse does and how they continue it,” he says. “Where Syracuse jumps into the ‘I’ve never heard of this before’ category is that here, the people with the lived experience are the ones with the power. To step back and let the disability community lead and to have city planners listen and take direction from the folks having lived experience, that’s very unique. So many people in Syracuse break the mold—you’ve got a really radical set of individuals who, from the beginning of the idea, listened and believed and took action from the disability community.”

Hands-On Rewards

The hands-on learning students experienced was important to their training as designers, Carr says. “In teaching design, this is a great way to get students to co-design with individuals in our community to address real needs. Together, we’re able to build, test and modify these ideas on the fly. It’s very rewarding to work alongside someone and then see their immediate reaction vs. purchasing a product that, in the end, might not address their actual need.”

From an inclusive design standpoint having projects where faculty can jump in helps Syracuse be a leader in the accessibility space, and having an adaptive design focus is a major attractor for the University’s graduate design program, Carr says. “That’s because there are opportunities for students to do grant-based work as part of their studies and then apply ideas throughout their careers.”

In a newly-published paper, “,” researchers at Syracuse University College of Arts and Science examine how certain strains of bacteria, and specifically the genetic diversity of acetic acid bacteria, influence the smell and flavor of sourdough bread and even how it is processed by the body.

While previous research has focused more on lactic acid bacteria and yeast in sourdough bread, acetic acid bacteria (AAB) and its the ecology, genomic diversity, and functional contributions remain largely unknown.

Researchers from Syracuse University and Tufts University sequenced 29 acetic acid genomes from a collection of over 500 sourdough starters and constructed synthetic starter communities in the lab to define the ways in which AAB shape emergent properties of sourdough. The team’s work was supported by a����awarded to Syracuse University Professor����earlier this year.

“While not as common in sourdough as lactic acid bacteria, acetic acid bacteria are better known for their dominant roles in other fermented foods like vinegar and kombucha,” says Beryl Rappaport, a Ph.D. student at Syracuse University and lead author of the report along with Oliverio. “For this study, we were interested in following up on previous findings which stated that when present in sourdough, AAB seems to have a strong impact on key properties including scent profile and metabolite production, which shape overall flavor formation.”

To assess the consequences of AAB on the emergent function of sourdough starter microbiomes, their team tested 10 strains of AAB, some distantly related and some very closely related. They set up manipulative experiments with these 10 strains, adding each one to a community of yeast and lactic acid bacteria.

“Since we can manipulate what microbes and what concentrations of microbes go into these synthetic sourdough communities, we could see the direct effects of adding each strain of AAB to sourdough,” says Rappaport. “As we expected, every strain of AAB lowered the pH of the synthetic sourdough (associated with increasing sourness) since they release acetic acid and other acids as byproducts of their metabolic processes. Unexpectedly, however, AAB that were more closely related did not release more similar compounds. In fact, there was high variation in metabolites, many related to flavor formation, even between strains of the same species.”

According to Rappaport, strain diversity is often overlooked in microbial communities, in part because it is difficult to identify and manipulate levels of diversity due to the vastness of microorganisms within a given community. By zooming into the diversity among closer relatives in the lab, researchers can start to understand key interactions in the microbiome.

The impact of this research is two-fold. ��When it comes to baking, she says their findings offer bread makers a new direction to shape sourdough flavor and texture.

“Since AAB reliably acidified the starters we worked with and released a large variety of flavor compounds, bakers who want their sourdough to be more sour or to create new flavors may try sourcing a starter with AAB or attempt to capture AAB themselves,” says Rappaport. “We hope that this study helps to shine a light on the diversity of microbes found in sourdough and their important functional roles.”

Their research could also have implications on the health benefits of sourdough bread.

During the fermentation process, AAB generates acetic acid, which significantly aids in breaking down gluten and complex carbohydrates, enhancing the digestibility of sourdough. By examining the genetic diversity of AAB and its influence on acetic acid production, researchers can develop strains that optimize this process.

The team uses sourdough primarily for its use as a model system because the sourdough microbiome is relatively simple to culture and use for repeated experiments in the lab. But their results stretch far beyond baking.

“Our findings will be relevant to people interested in more complex microbial communities, like the human gut or soil,” says Rappaport. This is because the sourdough system can be used to ask questions about ecology and evolution which would be more difficult to ask with more complex systems.

When it comes to the human gut, microbial communities can help build resilience to infections and improve efficiency in breaking down complex carbohydrates, fiber, proteins and fats. In the case of soil, microbes help to break down organic matter and maintain overall soil ecosystem stability. There are many unknowns, however, about how multiple levels of genetic diversity impact these processes.

By recognizing how strain diversity can have community-wide consequences on a microbiome, the team’s insights could have wide-ranging benefits for human health, wellness and environmental sustainability.

To arrange interviews with the researchers, please contact executive director of media relations Ellen James Mbuqe, ejmbuqe@syr.edu.

To request an interview with Professor Germain, please contact Ellen James Mbuqe, executive director of media relations, at��ejmbuqe@syr.edu.

By��, Professor of Law, Syracuse University College of Law.

Donald Trump’s legal woes have been the center of international attention throughout this 2024 presidential election year. In less than two months before the Presidential election, here is a summary of where all those cases currently stand.

The E. Jean Carroll Defamation Case.�� Trump’s year of litigation started in January with author E. Jean Carroll recovering�� an $83.3 million judgment for defamation against Trump for accusing Carroll of lying when she claimed publicly in 2019 that Trump had sexually assaulted her in a department store dressing room more than 20 years earlier, in 1995 or 1996.�� Trump posted a bond to obtain a stay while he appeals the judgment.

The NY Attorney General Financial Statement Fraud Case.�� In February, New York Attorney General Letitia James’ civil fraud case against Trump for overstating the current market value of his properties in the personal financial statements he had submitted to lenders and insurance companies, came to trial without a jury before Judge Arthur Engeron.�� Normally, civil fraud requires a plaintiff to prove that a victim believed and relied on the truth of the statements, and suffered damages as a result.�� But the Attorney General successfully argued that a special anti-fraud statute, New York Executive Law § 63(12), allows her to recover disgorgement of benefits received without showing that anyone relied on or was harmed by the false statements.�� Judge Arthur Engeron entered a judgment against Trump in February for $354 million in disgorgement, plus interest, which would have required him to post a $464 million bond to obtain a stay pending appeal.�� The appellate division allowed Trump to post a reduced bond of $175 million to stay enforcement of the judgment pending appeal.

The Georgia Election Interference Case.�� On June 5, the Georgia Court of Appeals issued an order staying District Attorney Fani Willis’s election interference case against Trump to consider Trump’s motion to disqualify the District Attorney for having an undisclosed relationship with her special prosecutor, Nathan Wade.�� The trial judge, Scott McAffee, had previously allowed the case to continue if Nathan Wade resigned to prevent the appearance of impropriety.�� The defendants appealed McAffee’s well reasoned order, and the case has been on hold by the appellate court since that time.�� Frankly, I thought McAffee’s opinion was sound, and I never understood why Willis’s relationship with Wade in any way harmed Trump or the other defendants.

The New York Falsified Business Records Case.�� Next came New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s convoluted criminal case against Trump for falsifying his business records to hide a $175,000 hush money payment made to Stormy Daniels through Trump’s then attorney Michael Cohen in the waning days of the 2016 election.�� I have .�� On May 30, 2024, the jury found Trump guilty under NYPL § 175.10 of falsifying business records to commit fraud and to conceal another crime, although the jury did not have to indicate who was defrauded or what other crime Trump was trying to conceal.�� Trump was supposed to be sentenced on September 18, but Judge Merchan granted Trump’s request to postpone sentencing until after the election.�� Sentencing is currently scheduled for November 26.

The Federal Cases.�� The two federal court cases brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith are the most serious cases Trump faces, and both cases have been stuck in the mud for months.

The Federal Election Interference Case.�� The federal election interference case before District Judge Tanya Chutkan in Washington DC has been delayed by questions about presidential immunity, and now also by technical issues around special prosecutor Jack Smith appointment.�� These preliminary issues will need to be resolved before the case can proceed on the merits.

On July 1, 2024, the Judge Chutkan’s and the DC Circuit Court’s rulings that Donald Trump, as a former president, had no immunity from prosecution.

Frankly, I expected that the Supreme Court would reverse those decisions, and recognize that a president has immunity from criminal prosecution for “core” presidential activities.�� In fact, at the hearing before the Supreme Court, both the government and Trump’s lawyers agreed that an ex president is immune from prosecution for “official” presidential matters, and that there is no immunity for “private” matters.�� Trump’s team even agreed that many matters alleged in Smith’s complaint sounded like “private” not “official” matters.�� The disagreement was on how far “official” matters would go.

I was fairly confident that the Supreme Court would draw the official /private distinction by focusing on the president’s motives – was the president acting to further what he believed to be in the interests of the country, or did he have personal, corrupt, motives to benefit himself at the expense of the country?

I was wrong. Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion granted immunity far beyond what the Trump lawyers sought at the hearing. The Court held, first, that a president’s motives are entirely irrelevant to whether his activities are “official” and subject to immunity, or “private” and not subject to immunity.�� Under the Court’s ruling, a president has absolute immunity for anything plausibly connected to his presidential functions, including the most blatant kinds of corruption (such as selling presidential pardons to the highest bidder, or directing the military to assassinate a political rival).�� While it is difficult to imagine that the founders intended the Constitution to provide broad immunity from prosecution to a President Benedict Arnold, who sold out his country for personal gain, that was essentially the Court’s holding.

In an attempt to redraw the official/private distinction, Prosecutor Jack Smith has filed a superseding indictment eliminating the allegations that Trump conspired with his governmental advisors, and has labeled his allegations that Trump conspired with non-governmental advisors to be “private.”�� But the labels do not matter.�� Under the Supreme Court’s ruling, Trump is immune from activities that fall within a very broad sphere of presidential activity, even if he had false, improper and corrupt motives for his actions. Given the extremely broad way that the Supreme Court defined “official” activities and rejected motive, it is difficult to see how any of Trump’s attempts to overturn the election would qualify as purely “private” activities.

Nevertheless, Judge Chutkan and the DC Circuit will likely try to read the immunity ruling more narrowly than the Supreme Court wrote it, and allow the case to proceed.�� And if the case does proceed, and Jack Smith is able to prove his allegations that Trump knew he lost the election, knew that his election interference claims were false, and nevertheless sought corrupt motives to overturn the election, then surely a jury would convict him. ��But would the case survive another visit to the Supreme Court?�� Judge Chutkan set a briefing schedule for the parties to argue the immunity question, with Trump’s reply brief due on October 29.�� Since the case cannot move forward before the court rules on the immunity question, the only thing that could happen before the election is the filing by Jack Smith of evidence that support his arguments that Trump’s activities were “private” and not immune.

The second preliminary issue is whether Jack Smith’s appointment as special prosecutor was constitutional, and if not whether the case should be dismissed.�� As discussed below, Judge Eileen Cannon dismissed the classified documents case against Trump on the grounds that Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional.�� That decision is currently on appeal, and Chutkan stated on the record that she did not find Judge Cannon’s ruling to be “very persuasive.”�� Judge Chutkan will likely decide that special prosecutor Jack Smith can proceed with the prosecution, but the process may be delayed further for briefing on that issue, and the ultimate ruling on Judge Cannon’s dismissal could derail the election interference case.

The Classified Documents Case.

In my view, the strongest case against Donald Trump is the classified documents case, which has been stymied at every turn by Judge Eileen Cannon.�� Cannon, a Trump appointee, was previously and harshly , in an unusual unanimous per curium opinion, for improperly exercising equitable jurisdiction over the government’s investigation into the classified documents taken by Trump while leaving office.

After months of slow walking the case, on July 15, 2024, Judge Cannon , determining that the Justice Department regulation under which Special Prosecutor Jack Smith was appointed was unconstitutional under the appointments clause of the Constitution.

The Constitution’s appointments clause requires the President to appoint, and the Senate to confirm, all “Officers of the United States,” except for “inferior Officers” who can be appointed by Officers without Senate approval if the Officers are authorized by law to make the appointment.�� .�� The courts have recognized that mere “officials” and “employees” can be hired without authorizing legislation, presidential appointment, Senate approval, or direct appointment by authorized Officers.�� The distinctions between “Officers,” “Inferior Officers,” “Officials” and “Employees” is not defined in the Constitution, and depends on factors like power, authority, control, and permanency.�� By tradition, cabinet officers and the heads of agencies are Senate-approved “Officers,” including the Attorney General and all 93 US Attorneys running the district offices of the Justice Department.�� The thousands of assistant US Attorneys and all of their staff are inferior officers, officials or employees, and are not appointed by the President or confirmed by the Senate.

The technical issue is whether Special Counsel Jack Smith, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland under the Department of Justice’s special counsel regulation, is an “Officer” who must be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, an inferior officer who was appointed by an authorized Officer, or an official or employee who could be hired without Senate approval or congressional authorization.

The legal firepower behind Judge Canon’s decision comes from a law review article by Professors Steven G. Calabresi and Gary Lawson, Why Robert Mueller’s Appointment As Special Counsel Was Unlawful, 95 Notre Dame L. Rev. 87,115–16 (2019).�� Calabresi and Lawson also filed amicus briefs with the Supreme Court in the Trump immunity case, and before Judge Cannon.�� Even though it was not an issue the Supreme Court agreed to hear, Justice Thomas wrote a concurring opinion in the election interference case throwing his support behind questioning Jack Smith’s appointment.

While Calabresi and Lawson’s technical legal arguments, and Judge Cannon’s adoption of those arguments, are plausible, they fly in the face of 50 years of practice, including the Supreme Court’s famous Watergate tapes decision in , brought by special counsel Leon Jaworski, who was appointed under a similar justice department regulation, and whose appointment was not questioned by the Supreme Court.

There are legitimate criticisms of the Special Counsel Regulations.�� If the Justice Department has a conflict of interest, should they be the ones to select the special counsel?�� In 1978, after Watergate, Congress created a Special Prosecutor Act, later called the Independent Counsel Act, which allowed majorities of either party within the House or Senate Judiciary Committee to request that the Attorney General appoint a special prosecutor.�� If the Attorney General made the appointment, a three judge panel of appellate judges, rather than the conflicted Attorney General, would select the special prosecutor.�� This process provided some assurance that the special prosecutor would be independent from the conflicted justice department.�� The Supreme Court upheld the Act in , but the Clinton administration did not seek its renewal, preferring instead to control the process through agency regulation, which has created the issue.

There is really no way to know if the current Special Counsel Regulations are constitutional until the Supreme Court rules on them.�� But even if they are not constitutional, there is no reason for dismissing the indictment against Trump.�� Instead, the courts should allow the government to fix the problem by appointing a senate-approved “Officer,” such as the Attorney General or another United States Attorney to supervise the prosecution.�� Professors Calabresi and Lawson have recognized that this is a technical constitutional issue that can be cured by appointing an approved “Officer” to supervise the case.�� The technical defect in Smith’s appointment, which is easily curable, did not prejudice the defendants.�� There is no reason that a United States Attorney appointed to supervise the case now could not ratify Smith’s past work, and allow Smith to proceed with the prosecution under supervision.�� A case prosecuted by Jack Smith under the supervision of the United States Attorney would be like the thousands of cases brought by Assistant United States Attorneys every day in every jurisdiction.

What Happens Next?

The presidential election will take place on November 5, 2024.

If Trump wins the election, there is little doubt that he will cause the federal election interference and classified documents cases to be dismissed, either by appointing loyalists to take over the prosecution in the Justice Department, or by issuing himself a presidential pardon.�� The Supreme Court has signaled in its immunity decision that a self-pardon is within the President’s absolute authority.

However, a presidential pardon only applies to federal crimes, so it would not prevent any of the state prosecutions or cases from continuing.�� It is not clear whether a state prison sentence could be implemented against a sitting president, or how it could be implemented, or whether some sort of federal supremacy would prevent the states from interfering with the activities of an elected president.�� Another constitutional crisis is likely if either of the state criminal cases results in a prison sentence.

If Trump loses the election, he will likely face years of trials and appeals before the legal issues will be finally determined.

A professor who is an expert on criminal court pretrial appearance is partnering with computer science faculty to see if artificial intelligence tools and optimized data analysis can improve fairness and efficiency in scheduling defendants’ court dates.

, Crandall Melvin Professor of Law and a 2022-25 Laura J. & L. Douglas Meredith Professor of Teaching Excellence, is one of three researchers on the��project, “.”��She and , assistant professor of computer science at the University of Virginia (formerly of Syracuse University) and , associate professor of computer science and engineering at Washington University in St. Louis received a $600,000 National Science Foundation (NSF) grant for the research. They are examining three issues: the uniformity and fairness of criminal court-date scheduling processes, if individual circumstances are considered when setting court dates, and whether a “smarter” computerized system can produce more equity and efficiency in those processes.

Ensuring that defendants who are released before trial return to court as scheduled is one of the primary goals of the pretrial process, Gouldin says. “Fortunately, data across jurisdictions suggest that most defendants show up for court as required. With bail reform efforts in many jurisdictions leading to higher rates of pretrial release, courts are focused on ensuring that pretrial appearance rates remain high,” she says.

Scheduling court appearances on dates and at times that work for defendants will help keep pretrial appearance rates high and avoid court system inefficiencies, she believes. Many factors—often legitimate hardships—can influence whether a defendant appears in court when scheduled. Gouldin says those factors are not consistently considered by courts and there is little uniformity in how appearance dates are scheduled from court to court.

The researchers are working to produce a system that predicts dates and times when defendants are more likely to appear versus being assigned an arbitrary court date or time. They believe having that knowledge, along with more flexibility in scheduling court dates—such as setting evening or weekend appearance dates—could improve pretrial appearance rates and create a more equitable scheduling process overall.

No-Show Factors

“Whether a defendant can appear in court when assigned depends on individual circumstances. Some may have work or school obligations or need to find childcare or arrange transportation. Others having substance addictions or mental health issues may be more at risk to miss dates; some defendants just don’t understand the court system; and people with disabilities may face specific challenges getting to court on time. In addition, some defendants who must repeatedly return to court can wait all day for their cases to be called, then find out the proceedings are postponed for a month,” Gouldin says.

But criminal courts can be inflexible, she adds. “Maintaining a perfect attendance record under these circumstances, and when so many court appearances are adjourned seems especially unreasonable. I believe courts can likely improve pretrial appearance rates by developing more flexible scheduling practices that account for these challenges.”

Data Input

This summer, Gouldin is working with research assistants to develop partnerships with judges, court administrators, pretrial service offices and criminal defense organizations in Syracuse and across New York State to collect data on the information that courts consider and the processes they use to schedule criminal cases.

Fioretto and Yeoh will take that data and apply what they call “” a scheduling approach that integrates machine learning algorithms with mathematical optimization and computerized logical reasoning. The AI-based approach aims to predict dates and times when an individual would be more likely to be able to appear in court. The researchers will incorporate defendants’ potential constraints into the date predictions and then develop mechanisms to ensure that court appearances are scheduled fairly for defendants of different races and genders.

Time, Money Costs

Fairness is an important consideration because judges can impose consequences for missing scheduled appearances even when defendants have justifiable reasons for not showing up, according to Gouldin. “Judges often make high-stakes decisions that implicate fundamental liberty interests, such as detaining defendants before trial or imposing bail, electronic monitoring, pretrial supervision or curfews. Failures to appear also become part of a defendant’s court record and may impact future pretrial liberty.”

The researchers are also mindful of the court’s administrative efficiency goals. Missed court dates mean inconveniences and costs of time and money for judges, attorneys, court personnel, witnesses and other defendants whose cases may be delayed as a result, as well.

Phase 2

Gouldin hopes eventually to gather court appearance data that will include defendants’ demographic details to assess whether specific factors affect the ability or inability to meet a pre-set court appointment. That step could reveal further ways to increase fairness in scheduling, she says. Having individuals return for their court appearances is more important than ever now, Gouldin says, because pretrial reforms in the U.S. over the past 10 years have overhauled traditional money bail systems so that more defendants are released before trial.

Gouldin’s pre-trial appearance work has been cited in federal court decisions, in state and federal amicus briefs and in testimony to the House Judiciary Committee. In 2022, she served as a consulting expert for federal litigation where a Tulsa County, Oklahoma money bail system was eventually deemed unconstitutional. Her article, “Keeping Up Appearances,” an analysis of law and policies governing pretrial appearance, which has been developed in part with the support of the NSF grant, is due to be published in the University of California Davis Law Review later this year.

A group of faculty and graduate students are part of a growing movement in academia that is re-evaluating long-held assumptions about research design.

Critical Quantitative Theory seeks to disrupt the traditional dichotomy between quantitative and qualitative research methods, with the former typically assumed to be more rigorous and suited to “hard” sciences and the latter seen as more subjective and better suited for use with critical theoretical perspectives. By disrupting this dichotomy, CritQuant—sometimes called QuantCrit—seeks to use data and statistics in a more equitable way, arguing that by doing so, it might become a useful and more racially just method of examining social justice questions.

Introduced in a 2018 Race Ethnicity and Education journal article—“”—this method calls on education researchers to explore inequity by examining data sets and statistics through critical analytical frameworks, such as critical race theory (CRT), intersectionality and feminism.

At the School of Education, an interdisciplinary team of faculty and graduate students has been meeting twice a month—since spring 2023—as the Critical Quantitative Research Forum. Among its original members are , associate professor of reading and language arts; , associate professor of higher education; , associate professor of counseling and human services; , associate professor of quantitative research methodology; , associate professor of teaching and leadership; and doctoral student ParKer Bryant, a Lender Center for Social Justice Fellow.

Change and Possibility

“There is a primacy to quantitative data because it is seen as objective, so its findings have a privileged status,” says Professor Johnson. “Some people tend to trust quantitative data and see it as more valid than qualitative research methods, such as ethnographies, interviews or case studies.”

One reason for this paradigm, explains Johnson, is that in qualitative research, the researcher is the “instrument” that gathers data, through an interview or by analyzing texts “as opposed to a quantitative instrument, such as a survey that is analyzed by software.” Thus, the quantitative researcher is assumed to be impartial and their experiences or beliefs irrelevant. That assumption has sometimes cloaked biased research and conclusions, as with the widely criticized 1994 study .

“If quantitative research is the privileged approach, then it needs to be transformed if we are going to work toward equity,” Johnson says. “We can’t put all the work of addressing critical equity questions on qualitative researchers, so how can we use statistics to tell the story of social justice, point out inequities and put forward ideas of change and possibility that illuminate and address structural inequalities? I’ve been thinking about this since I was a grad student.”

A Challenging Space

As a current doctoral student, Bryant is researching the impact of academic language on creative thought. It’s a topic traditionally suited to qualitative methods, such as interviews, surveys and ethnography, she says. However, she became interested in CritQuant “because I wanted to explore my research question thoroughly. I’m already familiar with qualitative research, but I want to understand quantitative methods such as linear and advanced statistical models. There’s no reason not to know quantitative models.”

The research forum is collegial, Bryant observes. “What I tell my friends is that faculty really want to be there, so it feels as if you are having high intellectual conversation among colleagues. It’s a challenging space.”

Bryant was invited by the faculty members to join an internal grant project that continues the forum’s work.

“How Can Educational Inequities Caused by Racial Wealth Gap Be Reduced? A Critical Quantitative Analysis of Individual, Home, and School” is using quantitative methods to examine whether individual or institutional-level factors have a greater influence on “the mediated relationships among socioeconomic status, opportunity to learn and students’ learning outcomes.”

“This study aims to contribute to advancing quantitative methods in educational research using the CritQuant framework based on critical race theory and intersectionality,” writes principal investigator Jang. “We believe that educational scholars would benefit from our work in considering CritQuant as a racially just method.”

Peeling Back Assumptions

Given her scholarly work focuses on the effects of campus climate on the sense of belonging of students of color in science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields, Johnson is well-situated to critique the quantitative vs. qualitative dichotomy.

The reason why qualitative research is appropriate for answering questions of social justice is that “it can tap into communities the way that other research can’t, by asking about lived experiences or centering marginalized and minoritized voices,” she says.

Conversely, quantitative research is seen as not amenable to social justice work because statistics can be used to advance and explain non-equitable conclusions, as in “The Bell Curve.” “The history and restrictions of quantitative methods are seen as having limited value in an equity agenda. Folks like myself, trained in quantitative methods, are trying to figure out ways to use statistical research methods within critical frameworks such as CRT.”

One technique to make quantitative research more equity-minded—“positionality”—dispenses with the idea that the researcher is impartial. “CritQuant forces researchers to position themselves in the research and asks them to consider their biases and subjectivity,” Johnson says. “Research questions arise from somewhere, after all.”

Johnson says her research interests often return her to when she was director of minority student affairs at Worcester (Massachusetts) Polytechnic Institute, supporting Black, Latinx and Indigenous students. “That experience created lots of questions for me, and I often think back to the challenges my students had,” Johnson says.

“My experiences as a Black woman working at primarily white institutions frames where I’m coming from in my research, and CritQuant makes me reckon with that,” Johnson says. “Qualitative researchers are expected to do this work, so why aren’t quantitative researchers expected to do the same? We encourage our doctoral students to write out their positionality in their research design, in order to peel back assumptions of unbias and objectivity.”

Structures and Systems

Another technique is embedded in the CritQuant forum’s grant project and speaks directly to why the method has the power to transform educational research.

“Quantitative research often can situate deficits on the people being studied, whereas CritQuant research can be used to examine structures,” says Johnson. “In other words, we’ve spent a lot of time trying to fix the student, but critical quantitative research has the power to examine whether outcome differences might be environmental or institutional. Maybe we don’t need to fix the student but instead look at fixing the structures and systems.”

As education graduate students ask more questions about how to integrate CritQuant into their research topics, the research forum is becoming a space where faculty can share their own experiences and challenges, such as how to use quantitative methods with subject groups that are small in number or how to incentivize participation ethically.

“I research groups that are already minoritized on campuses,” Johnson says, “so when researching campus climate, I have to be able to overcome survey fatigue and build relationships in order to ask questions about racism and sexism. There is an extra labor required on the part of the researcher.”

Johnson sums up the work of the research forum as enacting the “critical” part of Critical Quantitative Theory. “It’s exciting to engage with faculty and graduate students in an informal way to sort that out.”