The Korbel School’s Scrivner Institute of Public Policy and DU’s Center for Immigration Policy Research (CIPR) recently joined forces to present a Scrivner Policy Roundtable focusing on the DU Courtwatch Project. The Scrivner Policy Roundtable offers a chance for the DU and local policy communities to dive deep into pressing local issues. Designed to spark dialogue and build bridges, the roundtables are more than just discussions—they’re a catalyst for connection and action. The Scrivner Institute organizes the series and convenes the policy community in Denver and on campus, while partner organizations present their work or research and facilitate robust group discussions on the topic at hand.

The Scrivner Policy Roundtable is a fruitful example of leveraging synergies between DU entities and the Denver community to spur partnerships and opportunities to collaborate. The discussions that the roundtable facilitates among students, community organizations, faculty, and staff provide a more intimate, organic, and engaging way for students to network with the community, opening up potential projects, internship, or employment opportunities for students interested in local policy.

The latest Roundtable, “(In)Justice in the Immigration Court System,” was led by CIPR faculty, student research assistants, and community partners, including:

• Rebecca Galemba - Korbel School Professor and CIPR Co-director
• Lisa Martinez - Professor of Sociology and CIPR Co-director
• Liz Jordan - Visiting Assistant Professor of Law and Director of the Immigration Law & Policy Clinic
• Student research assistants - Ella Iveslatt, Kelly Nilan, Jasmine Salgado Simentel, and Kay Shepherd; and
• Community partners - Colorado Asylum Center and the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network (RMIAN)

Panelists presented on the historical influences and current structure of the U.S. immigration court system, while also sharing personal observations of the Denver immigration court system. Their research focuses on two expedited mechanisms: the Dedicated Docket and the Family Expedited Removal Management Program (FERM). Table and group discussions following the presentation emphasized how academic research can advance social and policy change by bolstering transparency and promoting due process in a widely misunderstood and overburdened immigration system. Dr. Galemba noted that much of Denver’s immigration court proceedings are open to the public, saying “it takes an army to look at the immigration system.” The presenters extrapolated important lessons we can apply to the current moment in American immigration, which is seeing an unprecedented erosion of due process and a delegitimization of the internationally recognized right to claim asylum.

This collaborative Roundtable event, brought to life by the combined efforts of the Scrivner Institute and the CIPR, is the most recent example of the ways Korbel faculty and staff are connecting students with the broader Denver community. “It was informative, fascinating, and inspiring to hear the words of faculty, students, and community partners in conversation with each other about their intersecting sets of knowledge and shared commitment to using that knowledge for the collective good," said Dr. Naazneen Barma, Director of the Scrivner Institute of Public Policy and Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs at the Korbel School of International Studies. Korbel student, sophomore Klaire Cherryhomes, shared “I really valued the research, the empirical aspect of the presentation. Research is an essential way to deliver rights. Providing transparency to these incredibly closed-off systems is powerful."

The Scrivner Policy Roundtable exemplifies the Scrivner Institute’s commitment to its mission to equip students to tackle today’s most crucial policy issues with a local to global perspective and an emphasis on practical solutions. The Institute and Korbel School are dedicated to providing students opportunities to participate in essential, timely policy discussions by collaborating across DU and working alongside essential community partners.

Watch the recording of the event here, and to learn more about the Scrivner Policy Roundtables, visit the Scrivner Institute’s website.

This article was written with support from Scrivner Institute student Program Assistant Katia Diamond-Sagias.

RadioEd co-host Jordyn Reiland chats with Assistant Professor Ajenai Clemmons about community policing and what people need to both be safe and feel safe. Listen to their interview here.

What makes you feel safe? Is it a familiar voice on the phone, a particular place, friends or family by your side, your spiritual beliefs or even a favorite blanket?

What about a person outside your personal circle, like a paramedic, a lifeguard, a firefighter or a police officer?

20-year-old Joseph said that people should feel safe around police officers, but that isn’t always the case in Durham, North Carolina—where he lives—and elsewhere.

He says, “I think that police officers almost have to have a—not necessarily nurturing aspect, but kind of like a—sense of safety about them. Because you should feel safe around police officers, you know? I don’t necessarily know how to put that in a word, but I think that you should definitely just feel safe around police officers.”

So how can police departments increase safety and earn trust in the communities where they work?

University of Denver Assistant Professor of Public Policy Ajenai Clemmons’ research answers these questions that can extend beyond North Carolina.

On this episode of RadioEd, co-host Jordyn Reiland chats with Clemmons about how the men she interviewed made sense of policing in their neighborhood—and what they needed to both be safe and feel safe.

Clemmons is an assistant professor of public policy at the Scrivner Institute. She researches the policing of marginalized communities in democratic contexts, particularly the United States and Europe. She teaches courses on the politics of the policymaking process, intersectional inequality, as well as state violence and local security.

More Information:

What the Durham Police Department Can Do to Enhance Safety and Earn Trust

Transcript

RadioEd S5E3: 

Guest: Ajenai Clemmons, Assistant Professor of Public Policy at the Scrivner Institute

Jordyn Reiland (00:04)

You're listening to RadioEd, the University of Denver podcast. I'm your host Jordyn Reiland.

What makes you feel safe? Is it a familiar voice on the phone, a particular place, friends or family by your side, your spiritual beliefs or even a favorite blanket?

What about a person outside your personal circle, like a paramedic, a lifeguard, a firefighter or a police officer?

20-year-old Joseph said that people should feel safe around police officers, but that isn’t always the case in Durham, North Carolina — where he lives — and elsewhere.

He says, “I think that police officers almost have to have a—not necessarily nurturing aspect, but kind of like a—sense of safety about them. Because you should feel safe around police officers, you know? I don’t necessarily know how to put that in a word, but I think that you should definitely just feel safe around police officers.”

So how can police departments increase safety and earn trust in the communities where they work?

University of Denver Assistant Professor of Public Policy Ajenai Clemmons’ research answers these questions that can extend beyond North Carolina.

Clemmons’ work around policing began in 2004 when she worked as a Community Relations Ombudsman in Denver. During that time Clemmons helped create a new government agency called the Office of the Independent Monitor.

Ajenai Clemmons (01:24) 

This was in response to some very high-profile incidents, some officer-involved deaths of civilians in Denver and so the city, the citizens rose up. The city came together across all agencies and volunteers from the community as well, to study new systems of civilian oversight that could improve transparency and accountability for public safety in Denver.

Jordyn Reiland (01:49)

The role of the Office of the Independent Monitor allows for an outside party to ensure law enforcement investigations are fair, thorough and timely and that any discipline is reasonable and appropriate.

Civilian oversight of law enforcement is something that's been around for some decades now, but it looks different in every city. Civilian commissions or boards exist in cities throughout the country including Los Angeles, Chicago, Kansas City, Missouri and Detroit.

Clemmons also spent time in Washington, D.C. between 2010 and 2015, where she was the policy director for a national professional association of Black state legislators.

At that time there were a series of high-profile shootings across the country, including Travyon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Sandra Bland and Freddie Gray.

Clemmons’ interest in policing of marginalized communities only grew from there.

In 2018 until just before the onset of the pandemic, she conducted in-depth interviews with 18- to 29-year-old African American men—like 20-year-old Joseph, who we heard from earlier. These men lived in the most economically distressed, high violent crime areas in Durham.

Clemmons’ work sought to understand how they made sense of policing in their neighborhood — and what they needed to both be safe and feel safe.

She acknowledged the challenges of conducting this type of research in the community and wanted to find ways to ensure people felt the most comfortable sharing their thoughts — positive or negative.

Ajenai Clemmons (03:10)

I went out on foot into these neighborhoods and recruited them. I was in barber shops, I was on basketball courts talking to young men during halftime and trying to pull them aside to see if they were interested in my study. I was hitting the streets. So we did these interviews in a private location. I wanted them to be confidential so that people could be candid. These are very complex feelings that people have, and I wanted them to feel that they could be vulnerable, that they could feel comfortable to be fully honest about whether their experiences were negative, whether they were positive or whether they were neutral, that they would have the full range to discuss whatever they wanted. I was very honored that they were so forthcoming. And they didn't sugar coat anything, and they didn't hold back. And it wasn't just..they were also self-reflective. They talked about what their experiences were like as kids, as youth, as teenagers, you know, being angry, whether they had a chip on their shoulder or not, or whether they were trying to stay out of trouble, and the kinds of ways that they... the kinds of things that they did to keep themselves safe.

Interlude

Jordyn Reiland (04:44)

Why don't people trust the police?

Ajenai Clemmons (04:46)

Yeah, this is a very big question. It's simple, but it's actually complex in a lot of ways. So in a nutshell, people don't trust police when they feel like they're not doing their jobs. They trust police when they feel under policed, when they feel that police are not competent, and I'll talk about that in a second. And they also feel they don't trust police. When they feel that police are being abusive and they're harming them. So they're sort of over policed, right? So these are the neighborhoods that I study. I literally study neighborhoods that are considered by their residents to be over policed and under policed. So in these communities, there's this intense police presence. Residents are stopped on foot or in their vehicles in a way they describe as constant, intrusive and harassing. They describe many officers as quick to accuse them of wrongdoing, right to curse at them and to use unnecessary and excessive force. Yet in these same neighborhoods, in spite of all the police activity going on, they still face high levels of crime, right? And that includes violent crime, and so this causes stress and insecurity on their part. So there's this sense that you know there are all these police around, but they're not there when you need them, right, or they're not in the right spots or focused on the right priorities, or they don't care about us.

When people feel abandoned and neglected, sometimes they distance themselves in return. And so it goes beyond this sense of trust or mistrust, it can breed legal cynicism. And cynicism is this orientation in which the law and agents of its enforcement, like the police and courts, are viewed as illegitimate. They're viewed as unresponsive and ill-equipped to ensure public safety, and that's a definition from Kirk and Papachristos. So it is very much a sense of feeling alienated. And that can go beyond police. It can extend to the judicial system writ large. But when this happens, when people don't trust police anymore and they are cynical toward them, it's rational from the perspective of looking at an individual, but it actually harms the community as a whole, because what happens is that people won't report crime as much, right? They won't cooperate with investigations, they won't serve as witnesses in the court of law as readily, and this can make it very hard to bring people who commit crimes to justice, and I'm not talking about, you know, unserious crimes. I'm talking about serious crimes. And so, you know, these folks are not held accountable, and they are, in fact, making the community less safe. And then this further breeds the cynicism. It's a vicious cycle, because then people see folks running around who are threatening the community, and so then they even feel further alienated, as they feel that the police don't care about them.

Jordyn Reiland (07:55)

Wow, that must be so challenging, and it kind of alludes to what you were talking about with the different meanings and thoughts about safety. And I think you said feeling safe and being safe, if that's correct. Could you talk a little bit about that?

Ajenai Clemmons (08:11)

So in general, a lot of people assume that if crime numbers go down, then they will feel more safe, and that's actually not true. The perception of safety is completely independent of whether or not you are safe or your risk level. So crime went down for years, decades even, and people's assessment of the risk of crime really hasn't changed. And sometimes it went up, even though the crime was going down, depending on where you were. So those are two different things, and it actually makes police, their job tougher, because they do have that accountability of bringing down the crime levels. But then people can feel that way regardless. And so then they have to dedicate some considerable resources to making people feel safer.

In this context, though, there really is unacceptable levels of violent crime and so even though it's a tiny proportion of the population that's carrying it out, it is significant. And in a lot of it, there are innocent bystanders that get caught in the middle. And in fact, out of the men that I interviewed, eight had been shot at least once, and four of those were folks who were caught in the crossfire who didn't have any idea who the shooter was or were mistaken by the shooter for someone else. And then additional men that I interviewed who literally were at a bus stop, waiting for their bus to arrive to go to work, and ended up having to dive for cover as bullets whizzed past them, because somebody saw somebody that they had been looking for, and then, just without regard to the circumstances, just opened fire. So there really is an extraordinary level of risk in these particular neighborhoods, and so it is important for people to both be safer and to feel safer, and so I wanted to make sure that I was being intentional in pulling out those two things in the interviews.

Jordyn Reiland (10:36)

One question that you asked stood out to me, and you said, “If you had a magic wand and could make a perfect interaction happen between an officer and a civilian, what would you do?” And you said you can choose any scenario. Did any of those answers surprise you?

Ajenai Clemmons (10:52)

On the whole, most answers tried to find some sort of win-win. They tried to find some sort of reconciliation between both parties and ensure that that was a positive interaction. And so it wasn't the case that most people's first thought was to just take care of the needs of the civilian. That in that perfect scenario, they really did seek a win-win. And so I was struck by that. A lot of the men did use their wishes to also undo the deaths of the men who had been killed that we talked about earlier, those high-profile deaths that had happened across the country, there was a recognition of that. And it was something that all but one interview we related to on some level, that they could see themselves in those men who had died, or in those people who had died. We certainly want to take into account the women who have been killed as well. So they actually use their magic wand to undo those deaths and to undo the harms that have happened.

Jordyn Reiland (12:10)

You highlight five themes that emerged as the most desired characteristics for officers, including those who are just communicative, invested composed and discerning and adaptive in their decision making. Can you paint a picture for me of the ideal police officer?

Ajenai Clemmons (12:30)

There is not one person that I spoke with who thought that being a police officer was an easy job. Folks were very quick to say it is a hard job. Not everybody should be a police officer, there are a lot of things to manage. It was about being constitutional. People were clear about that. It was making sure that you're observing people's rights, that people are innocent until proven guilty—that officers are truly just in how they enforce the law.

But it goes beyond that. Really, they wanted officers to have integrity. They wanted officers to be good people. And I think this is because this is really the most powerful person in their lives. They're the only person who can literally take life. And so it is important then that people who hold the most amount of power are actually good and righteous, and because you don't have the opportunity to see officers outside of these sort of emergency situations, or time pressure situations, you need other opportunities to observe their behavior, to know if they're trustworthy, right? To know if you can bring confidential information to them, to know whether they will keep confidence and so this is where you know they wanted to see officers' character on display. How do you do that? Well, they got to get in the community. They’ve got to get involved.

Jordyn Reiland (14:14)

Clemmons said that what surprised her about her research in Durham was people’s inherent desire to have a connection and a relationship with law enforcement.

Ajenai Clemmons (14:22) 

Now maybe because they can't tell who's a safe officer and who's not a safe officer, and because there's so much unpredictability that is possible in those interactions, having positive encounters and having incredibly scary negative encounters, the safer thing to do could be to avoid police. To try to minimize the possibility of an experience, right? To keep a low profile.

But that ideally in their heart of hearts, many wished that they could just casually walk up to a police officer, say hi, chat, check in, or have that police officer do the same. That in their ideal world, that's what the general relationship would be between the police and the community. That you would see officers jumping in and playing double dutch, or joining in a pickup game of basketball or guiding a young person and talking to them about healthy life choices that those officers would be leading by example, that they would be a fabric of the community, that they would be rolling up their sleeves, and serving food and soup kitchens. And so there were so many ways that they saw police as able to be a force for good that I didn't expect. I didn't expect that level of specificity and of richness and of desire in elevating, actually, the importance and the impact that officers could have.

I also want to add a quote that I think exemplifies this desire for a better relationship and what it would take in order for officers to build trust in the community. So I named this interviewee, Marcus, and he's 25. This is what he says:

“Get police to come out here in these neighborhoods where a lot of these people are getting shot and killed and do something. Make a difference. Go drop off flowers at some of these people's graves. Act like a human being. You want the community to trust you? Do something for the community. Communication. Do a fundraiser. Do a get together, throw a police parade, you know? How many cops are out here, genuinely just to protect and serve? If, instead of judging us, officers would be more prone to trying to get to know the people they see every day, we wouldn't have so many problems with law enforcement and young black men in the communities. Pull up to the basketball court, play some ball with us. Throw a football with us. They're all frisbee for all I care. But do something."

Jordyn Reiland (17:15)

Yeah that really gets to the heart of that aspect of trust building and community involvement and really harkens back to just wanting to have that dual interaction.

Ajenai Clemmons (17:28)

You know, sometimes we can overthink what it would take for officers to create connections. But the desire is already there. It just needs an opportunity to be tapped into. And so it can be so many simple little things that officers can do to connect with folks in a way that's authentic, in a way that's joyful, to have that organic experience. And so those are the things that I'll be researching in the future and working on – like matching officers, even, with opportunities to connect and in activities like anything from this basketball or something sports, to arts and crafts and music, and all sorts of things that young people and officers could take a joint interest in.

Jordyn Reiland (18:24)

Clemmons posed a question that went beyond policing and asked participants if they could have the full attention and concern of anyone in power to fix or improve anything in their life, what would it be?

Here’s one response that really stuck with her.

Ajenai Clemmons (18:37)

This is a quote that really moved me. This is from a young man, Joseph, who's 20 years old, and he said:

“I would tell politicians to more so hear the letter, not the law, of what's being said, and to try to understand people's feelings, not just what they're saying. What comes out of their mouth is ultimately influenced by how they feel. So, if you can understand how someone feels, then you're more so to meet their expectations, not just do what they tell you to do. To say it in other words, when you understand how someone feels, you're more so to not necessarily make the same mistake again, if they understand how we feel when they're reading the analysis and not just see what we're saying, but see in what we are saying, like how we feel, it would help them to make better decisions about how to accommodate what we're saying.”

This is at the heart of what I am trying to do as a researcher, is certainly capture their words, but also pair that with their underlying emotions to capture how they feel, so that when I'm sharing my findings and evidence with policy makers, that they're able to see both. That they're able to see the words, read the words, hear the words, but also understand what's behind that, what's underlying that, that subtext, so that they can properly receive that, understand it and then try to address it in the most appropriate way.

Interlude

Jordyn Reiland (20:29) 

Now you write that, in addition to the work that you've done in Durham, at least hundreds, if not thousands of jurisdictions across the country would also be well served by participants' insights and calls for action. How does your work translate beyond North Carolina?

Ajenai Clemmons (20:44)

In terms of the policy recommendations that come out of this report, it is the relationship building. It's also the transparency. It's also the accountability. I mean, if you're not cleaning up things and making it better, if you're not resolving the problems that you know exist in your department, then you're not going to improve that relationship. So, there are many... the hiring, the recruitment, the policies that are in place, the accountability to make sure that those policies are being adhered to, the training and that follow up with the relationship building are all key.

And in Denver, we're fortunate that Police Chief Ron Thomas has taken an interest in this work as well, and so he has already taken many steps in his short—he just recently took over, was appointed relatively recently, and has already started implementing more community outreach programs. And so has asked me to advise on what implementation would look like. And so my colleague Kate Sims and I are working on that with the police department. So, we'll be rolling out a program and evaluating that and measuring and seeing what works, what doesn't work and how to improve upon that. And I think it's commendable, to see a chief that is deeply interested in the evidence base and being a willing partner in the research process to see what can work and how to improve and make things better.

Jordyn Reiland (22:37) 

This report is based on interviews that concluded in March 2020 and a lot has happened in the United States as it relates to policing since that time. How do you think about these findings in 2024?

Ajenai Clemmons (22:49)

I believe the findings are still very much relevant in 2024. In the interviews, which ended in March, which ended at the at the onset of the pandemic, the men were very vocal about the deaths that preceded George Floyd, which happened three months after I ended the interviews And so they related very much to the men that they had seen, the people that they had seen in the media. They were concerned about that, they used their magic wand and one of my questions to undo their deaths. So, this was at the forefront. It was something that they thought about when they got pulled over by police. So, George Floyd was not new, in other words, sadly. It was not new to them at all. And so in that sense, I think that the findings still stand.

There have been some researchers that have found in terms of behaviors, like, for example, calling the police to report a crime, that those can be temporarily affected by high profile, very disturbing incidents, but that with time, the behaviors return to normal. And so there's a sort of eventual kind of snap back effect, for lack of a better term, that happens. So whether it's reporting crime, whether it's their likelihood of cooperating with investigations, or avoiding police – whatever police behaviors they had before, whether they were avoiding them, whether they were cooperating with them, all of that, I think, is still relevant. There haven't been a ton of reforms that have happened across the country, not in any kind of systematic way. And so the concerns that they have are still very much present in most jurisdictions, and to the extent that some things were done, not nearly enough, as far as they would be concerned, so the problem is still there. The concerns are still there, and what they were calling for still remains. So yeah, I mean taking all that into account, would say that the findings still stand.

Jordyn Reiland (25:33)

A big thanks to our guest, University of Denver Assistant Professor of Public Policy Ajenai Clemmons. More information on her work can be found in our show notes. If you enjoyed this episode, I encourage you to subscribe to the podcast on Apple Music or Spotify, and if you really liked it, leave us a review and rate our work. It really helps us reach a larger audience and grow the pod.

Joy Hamilton is our Managing Editor, Madeleine Lebovic is our production assistant and musical genius, and James Swearingin arranged our theme. I'm Jordyn Reiland and this is RadioEd.

Article written by Jordyn Reiland.

Over the past two years, the Scrivner Institute of Public Policy and Korbel School have proudly partnered with the Aspen Institute to offer a Denver Dialogues panel at the Aspen Strategy Group’s annual Aspen Security Forum (ASF), the premier national security and foreign policy conference in the United States. This past July, the Scrivner Institute and Korbel School, in collaboration with the Aspen Strategy Group, convened a special edition panel at ASF entitled “The End of Soft Power?”, exploring the state of soft power in the contemporary global context.

This summer, the Aspen Institute generously extended four complementary passes to Korbel students to join Korbel Dean Fritz Mayer and Scrivner Institute Director Naazneen Barma at the Forum. After applying to receive one of the passes, Korbel students Omar Aittakalla, Micah DenBraber, Norair Hevorkian, and Hans Schaler were selected to attend the 15th annual Aspen Security Forum in Aspen, CO. The students made the most of the wonderful opportunity to engage with experts in international security and diplomacy, learn about the most pressing global issues from domestic and global leaders, and to network with policymakers, diplomats, and scholars.

Student attendee Omar Aittakalla, who is in the International Development graduate program, reflected on his experience: “Attending the Aspen Security Forum has been one of the most enriching experiences of my summer. The opportunity to engage with leaders who have shaped, are shaping, and will shape the future of global security was truly unparalleled. I had the privilege to converse with a diverse array of experts, including seasoned policymakers, influential thought leaders, and rising stars in the field…Topics ranged from the strategic implications of space and cybersecurity to the geopolitical dynamics of great power competition. These discussions not only deepened my understanding of the difficulties we confront on a global scale but also instilled in me a sense of optimism…"

"As I reflect on my time at the Aspen Security Forum, I am left with a renewed sense of purpose and a deeper appreciation for the collaborative efforts required to navigate the complexities our world is facing and will continue to face in the future.”

Micah DenBraber, another student attendee, said: “Attending the 2024 Aspen Security Forum was truly life changing. As an undergraduate international affairs major at Korbel, it was exhilarating to engage in conversations with top policy and business professionals in the national security space. A highlight of the forum was attending the Google AI security breakfast, where the new multi-stakeholder standards initiative, the Coalition for Safe AI (COSAI), was announced. This initiative brings together AI developers, industry leaders, academics, policymakers, and civil society organizations to promote the safe and responsible development, deployment, and governance of AI technologies. One of the most memorable moments for me was approaching a panelist during the AI security dialogue, where my initial nerves gave way to forming a valuable connection with someone who offered to support my BA thesis. As I enter my final undergraduate year, I’m excited to leverage the insights and connections gained at ASF to pursue opportunities in the global governance of artificial intelligence. I’m incredibly grateful to the Scrivner Institute and the Korbel School for facilitating this unmatched exposure to the nation’s leading national security practitioners and granting students such transformative opportunities.”

The Scrivner Institute and Korbel School are proud to partner with the Aspen Strategy Group in offering a transformative experience for our students and connecting a new generation of foreign policy leaders to ASG. We extend our thanks to the Aspen Strategy Group for their generous invitation for Korbel students to attend the Aspen Security Forum this summer and look forward to this mutually beneficial partnership in the years to come.

Join us for the next Scrivner Policy Roundtable, an event series with the aim of building a network and collaborative research and learning environment among local policy actors and the campus community. At this roundtable, the DU Center for Immigration Policy & Research (CIPR) will discuss findings from the DU Courtwatch Project, providing a brief explanation of U.S. immigration court proceedings with a focus on Denver’s non-detained immigration court.

Presenters will explain the Courtwatch Project and its focus on two expedited mechanisms: the Dedicated Docket and the Family Expedited Removal Management Program (FERM). Both programs were implemented under President Biden to attempt to speed up immigration proceedings for recently arriving migrant families seeking asylum. The research documents significant concerns about due process, access to representation and relief, and the overall workings of the immigration system.

The presentation will then transition into lessons we can apply to the current moment, which has been exacerbated by pre-existing obstacles as well as an erosion of due process and a delegitimization of asylum claims.

The DU Courtwatch Project is led by Dr. Rebecca Galemba (Korbel School) and in collaboration with:

• CIPR Faculty: Lisa Martinez (Sociology), Liz Jordan (Law), and Jesse Acevedo (Political Science)
• Student research assistants: Ella Iveslatt, Kelly Nilan, Jasmine Salgado Simentel, and Kay Shepherd

Community partners: Colorado Asylum Center and the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network (RMIAN)

Join the Scrivner Institute of Public Policy at the Josef Korbel School of International Studies for a conversation exploring the implications of the second Trump Administration on key policy areas. A panel of faculty experts will discuss the direction being taken by the Trump Administration on public health, the climate, immigration, the US and global economy, and global security. They will examine the stated and implicit intentions of the Trump Administration in these policy areas and analyze the potential consequences in the national and global policy landscape.

Light appetizers and refreshments will be served. Doors open at 5pm and the panel discussion will begin at 5:30pm.

The University of Denver has awarded the Scrivner Institute of Public Policy at the Josef Korbel School of International Studies the prestigious designation of "Institute status," recognizing its research excellence and its critical contributions to addressing today’s most pressing policy challenges. Established in 2018 through a transformative $14 million gift from Doug and Mary Scrivner, the Institute has become a leader in interdisciplinary research, civil discourse, and community engagement on local to global public policy issues.

Under the leadership of Professor and Director Dr. Naazneen Barma, the Scrivner Institute has seen remarkable growth, expanding its faculty and partnerships, more than doubling research funding, and producing numerous publications and policy reports. It has also developed innovative initiatives like the Colorado Project, Denver Dialogues, and Scrivner Policy Roundtables. “This recognition from the University is testament to the exceptional work of our faculty and staff and the Institute’s commitment to fostering meaningful policy research and dialogue at local, national, and global levels,” said Dr. Barma.

Fritz Mayer, Dean of the Josef Korbel School, praised the milestone: “The Scrivner Institute exemplifies what it means to be a hub for actionable, collaborative, and innovative public policy research. We are excited to see how its new Institute status will further elevate its impact.”

Learn more about the Scrivner Institute and its groundbreaking work at korbel.du.edu/scrivner.

This Cultural Diplomacy event was originally scheduled for October 11th, but was postponed due to illness.

Join the Sié Chéou-Kang Center for International Security and Diplomacy at the Josef Korbel School of International Studies in partnership with the School of Art and Art History for an evening of art, religion, and identity! This year's Lanius Lecture speaker is artist Maryam Taghavi, an Iranian-American artist who focuses her work on language, calligraphy, religion, and the intersection of these themes with identity and community. With opening remarks from Dr. Andrea Stanton (Korbel, Religious Studies) and Dr. Sarah Magnatta (SAAH), the evening will feature Taghavi's works as well as an open Q&A with the audience. Refreshments will be served.