Schedule of Events

This paper sheds light on the policy gaps and unintended consequences of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization specifically regarding reproductive care and Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). Reproductive care is beyond abortions, as it is vital for planning families and providing life saving medication or procedures. All segments of society are affected without legislation protecting this care; as well, it places marginalized groups such as minorities, LGBTQ+, and low income individuals at an even greater disadvantage. Access to this care is already limited for these populations, and without protection this challenge is further compounded. My recommendation for this issue would be enacting national or state legislation allowing citizens the ability to access comprehensive healthcare. 

The purpose of this study is to examine how women of color are at greater risk of experiencing sexual assault, and their voices are far less heard in American society. We must address that “Sexual violence against women of color has deep roots in U.S. history” [1]. Women have been fighting for rights for centuries, and have made monumental strides towards equality. However, battling a patriarchal society makes this a slow fight, and with the government becoming more blatantly politicized, we are seeing a direct attack on these accomplishments. Looking at the in depth history of violence against Black and Indigenous women, the study will examine the possibility of living in an America where these groups are not subject to this abuse. 
[1] “Sexual Violence & Women of Color: A Fact Sheet.” Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence, oaesv.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/oaesv-sexual-violence-women-of-color.pdf.

In 2023, over half of the world’s population used the internet. In July 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Council declared access to a free and open internet a human right, condemning intentional disruptions or restrictions imposed by governments or ISPs. Countries responded to this non-binding resolution with a range of ISP regulations. Net neutrality remains one central position and addresses concerns about the new age of information infrastructure, including digital censorship, technology monopolies, and a growing digital divide. With the role of public opinion being pushed below the accumulation of concentrated wealth, an open internet is desperately necessary. Ultimately, if the free flow of information is not prioritized, informed citizenry and democratic ideals will become obsolete.
This study examines how net neutrality impacts socioeconomic well-being and open political environments. To achieve this goal, this study will consist of three parts:


What is net neutrality and how has it been regulated?


How has net neutrality impacted socioeconomic well-being and open political environments?


How can net neutrality be regulated to ensure good governance?


Using mixed methods, this study will analyze quantitative data about socioeconomic well-being, including GDP and public trust. It will also compare ISP regulation to levels of a free flow of information. Balancing qualitative elements, the project will conduct in-depth interviews and site visits with a small sample representative of the connection of businesses, the political sphere, and internet policy. Case law and policy analysis will be additional data.

In recent years, additional frameworks that embrace alternative approaches to punishment for the U.S. criminal justice system have come to light. Across the country, the implementation of restorative justice has lowered recidivism rates, decreased social stigma, and made communities safer across the country. This approach focuses on healing the harm caused by crime through dialogue and reconciliation, rather than punitive measures. It includes the criminal offender, their victim, and others who may have been affected by the crime, including family and other members of the community. Alongside this shift, the theatre arts have emerged as an innovative tool in restorative justice, offering incarcerated individuals a unique means of self-expression and personal growth. This project explores how restorative justice and theatre are being implemented together within the U.S. criminal law system, investigating their combined impact on reducing recidivism, improving post-incarceration employment opportunities, and advancing educational outcomes for individuals leaving incarceration.
This project aims to assess whether integrating theatre into restorative justice practices can produce meaningful, measurable changes in the lives of formerly incarcerated individuals. By analyzing data on recidivism, employment, and educational outcomes, as well as conducting qualitative case studies, this research provides insight into the broader implications of this approach. The findings have the potential to inform policy discussions and offer new strategies for reducing the social and economic costs of incarceration, making a compelling case for the use of creative arts as part of a holistic restorative justice framework.

Evangelicals are well-known for their opposition to same-sex rights. Since same-sex rights were first argued in the Supreme Court in 1958, Evangelical political groups have voiced concern about how homosexuality violates the sanctity of marriage. This research proposes to test that an emphasis on family/morality in a SCOTUS case reflects the Evangelical narrative in opposition to same-sex rights. The methodology for this research is twofold. First, the language used by Evangelical political groups since 1980 in reference to the LGBTQ+ community is collected. For example, language such as “traditional values” and “moral standards” was put forward by several Evangelical political groups in the 1980s. Second, through text analysis of SCOTUS cases that deal with same-sex rights, a comparison of the language used by the Justices is made to the language used by the Evangelical groups. Language found in 1980s Evangelical groups can also be found in Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), which decided that the Fourteenth Amendment did not prevent a state from criminalizing sex between same-sex couples. Similar connections are made throughout the chosen timeline, raising the question of whether SCOTUS decisions are influenced by politicking of religious, political groups. Text analysis has long been used to track changing discourses over time and provide context to concepts (Gessler). This project is significant to understanding that SCOTUS, rather than upholding a “pure” view of the Constitution, is instead often a reflection of cultural norms on contentious social issues. While this isn’t a new finding, it’s newly applied to same-sex rights.

In August of 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued one of its most important rulings in recent history. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was a landmark decision addressing whether the Constitution protects the right to an abortion. In Dobbs, the Supreme Court reviewed the constitutionality of Mississippi’s Gestational Age Act—a law banning most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy with exceptions for medical emergencies and fetal abnormalities. In a divided opinion, the Court upheld the Mississippi law and overturned Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)—concluding that the Constitution does not protect the right to an abortion. As a result, the Court’s decision returned the issue of abortion regulation to the elected branches and the states. 
 
The purpose of this project is to examine state abortion laws regarding gestational periods and medical insurance since the Dobbs decision. This approach reflects the increasingly polarized landscape of reproductive rights in the U.S., where state-level policies vary dramatically, from the most restrictive environments to those that are most protective of abortion rights. This project will show that there are vast variations based from state to state regarding the essence in which abortion is legal along with other variables that go along with abortion procedures. The issue delves into not just a woman’s right but also the repercussions of states that are too extreme with the ban and states that are too lenient with the practice of abortion.