Campus Archives - Page 26 of 41

COVID-19 Vaccine in 2020 Highly Unlikely, Experts Caution

Video of COVID-19 Media Briefing: Vaccine Development

DURHAM, N.C. — Speculation that a vaccine for COVID-19 might be widely available by the end of this year is overly optimistic, three Duke experts said Wednesday.

While there may be substantial scientific progress by the end of 2020, there will still be significant manufacturing hurdles to clear before a vaccine is available to most people, the experts said during a briefing for media.

Below are excerpts from the briefing:

ON DR. ANTHONY FAUCI’S RECENT TESTIMONY ABOUT A VACCINE BY THE END OF 2020

David Ridley, health economist

“Dr. Fauci is quite optimistic. I think optimism is good. I think optimism has a really important role. We need people within these companies being optimistic. If everyone sits back and talks gloom and doom … nothing’s ever going to get done. So I respect that optimism.”

“But will you and I get vaccinated this year? No way. It’s possible a vaccine will be approved this year. But not at scale. We won’t have a lot of doses of this.”

“We might have some people vaccinated this year. But the average person won’t be vaccinated this year.”

Thomas Denny, chief operating officer, Duke Human Vaccine Institute

“If you’re going into a tough game, you need a coach that’s getting the team revved up. We may have some good science by the end of the year and think we have some leading candidates. But manufacturing them to have it all administered, that’s a tall order to be ready by the beginning of 2021.”

Ooi Eng Eong, deputy director, Emerging Infectious Diseases Programme, Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore

“Once we get to the efficacy phase and ask the question of whether this vaccine will work to prevent infection, that depends on how common the infection is at that time. If the situation still goes on as it is, we shouldn’t have any problem testing efficacy."

“But if for whatever reason the prevalence of the disease goes down, it will take us a much longer time to assess efficacy.”

“We’re not going to get rid of the coronavirus in a hurry. It’s going to stay with us. Even if we can vaccinate people, protect them from infection … the question is how long will immunity last?”

“If we think about using vaccines in stages, potentially we could get one, possibly at the soonest to me, about this time next year. Anything sooner than that is extremely optimistic. Others have said we could get it by the end of this year. I’m an optimistic person, but I’m not that optimistic.”

ON MANUFACTURING VACCINES ON A GLOBAL SCALE

David Ridley

“We’re preparing to manufacture at scale. Fortunately, some of these vaccine makers are already manufacturing now. Sanofi said they’re going to be able to make 100 million doses this year and a billion doses next year. That’s really unprecedented. Usually you’d wait to see if your vaccine is having some success. If you think there’s a 1-in-8 chance that you’re going to get on the market, and you’re already spending tens of millions, hundreds of millions of dollars, that’s kind of crazy. But that’s the crazy world we live in and I salute them for it.”

“Usually it takes years to manufacture. You want to be sure you got a good vaccine before you begin making it at scale. Typically this is going to take four or five years. Maybe now we can do it in one or two years. Part of this is going to depend on the appetite of these manufacturers to start building something now that they probably will never use.”

“My guess is this will take longer than people will assume because there will be a little bit of foot-dragging. If you drag your feet a little bit longer and make sure it’s a good vaccine, that it’s going to work before you make the huge investments in manufacturing, you can save a lot of money.”

ON LIKELIHOOD OF MULTIPLE VACCINES

Thomas Denny

“The duration of immunity post-vaccination is a major scientific issue we’re trying to understand. We’re also trying to understand right now what’s the duration of immunity after natural infection. That will help us probably understand how well or how well not vaccines will work for us.”

“One of the approaches we’re taking at the vaccine institute, we’re also exploring the potential development of a pan-coronavirus vaccine.”

“If we can develop a vaccine that would cover protection to all types of coronaviruses that may be a threat to us we think that would be a big benefit. That’s a longer-term goal for ours. It’s 18 months to two years out. I don’t think there are many playing in that space currently. Most are looking at the short-term COVID-19 pathogen and trying to get a rapid vaccine developed for that one.”

Ridley

“It’s very common for the second product, a later product to be better than the first. Lipitor was fifth to market for cholesterol drugs and was arguably better than the previous four.”

“It’s reasonable to expect that later entrants will be better. Assuming the virus is still with us and still a threat, I’d expect other companies to continue product development.”

ON VACCINE DEVELOPMENT COMPETITION

Ooi Eng Eong

“Obviously there’s pressure. There’s pressure from the demand from the public for a solution so they can go back to some level of normality in their lives. There’s pressure from colleagues in the hospitals saying we need to deal with this.”

“There’s also competition from other groups working on vaccines. I think competition is good. It forces us to think harder to come up with better, more innovative ways of doing things. There is pressure but I think at some level of pressure is good to really push the boundaries.”

ON SUPPLY SHORTAGES SLOWING VACCINE PROCESS

Ridley

“We need a lot of materials in this process. Some are very simple. Gowns and masks are pretty simple things. Swabs for diagnostics are pretty simple things. Rubber stoppers, medical glass sound pretty simple. But we really have a high standard for those because anytime we have something coming into contact with the vaccine that’s going to go straight into your blood stream, we have a really high standard for sterility.”

“Sterile water always seems to be in shortage. Water should be easy to make. But it has to be sterile because it’s going straight into the bloodstream. We can’t underestimate the importance of all these products along the line.”

“We might be a little concerned about hoarding. There’s cost to scaling up PPE. There’s cost to scaling up medical glass and rubber stoppers. Someone might hoard those. One of the vaccine manufacturers, one of the hospitals might try to grab those materials. There’s all sorts of parts in this process and if one of them breaks down, it slows the process of getting the vaccine to people."

ON VACCINE COSTS

Ridley

“None of the major vaccine manufacturers will charge ridiculous prices. They’re in this game to try to do good, to try to impress their employees, to try to impress their shareholders. They’re not going to do that by charging ridiculous prices.”

ON A VACCINE’S POTENTIAL USE AS A THERAPY AS WELL

Ooi Eng Eong

“We’re testing (our vaccine) as a preventative vaccine. But is an intriguing possibility. Our fight against the virus relies on the body to recognize first of all it’s infected with the virus. It triggers a series of processes. So it is entirely possibly theoretically that because we’re using an RNA vaccine, the vaccine will trigger the processes that will allow the (body) to fight an RNA pathogen.”

“We’ve only had this virus for seven months now. There’s a lot we don’t know about this virus.”

“Think about it like a thief breaking into your house. If this person is very skilled at overcoming your alarm, they will be able to break into your house. If you have another system that can activate the alarm while the break-in is in process, you would actually trap the thief. So it is something that is possible.”

ON WHO SHOULD GET VACCINATED FIRST

Denny

“Those with underlying medical conditions, and first-line responders. Hospital workers, they’re the highest priority. If we can’t keep those folks going, we’re in trouble.”

Faculty participants

Thomas N. Denny
Thomas Denny is chief operating officer of the Duke Human Vaccine Institute, a professor of medicine and an affiliate member of the Duke Global Health Institute. His administrative oversight includes a research portfolio of more than $400 million. Denny has served on numerous committees for the NIH over the last two decades.
thomas.denny@duke.edu

Ooi Eng Eong
Ooi Eng Eong is a professor of medicine and deputy director of the Emerging Infectious Diseases Programme at Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore. He also co-directs the Viral Research and Experimental Medicine Centre at the SingHealth Duke-NUS Academic Medical Centre (ViREMiCS), which studies therapies and vaccines against viral infections.
engeong.ooi@duke-nus.edu.sg

David Ridley
David Ridley is a professor of the practice at Duke’s Fuqua School of Business, where he is faculty director of the Health Sector Management program. He was lead author of the paper proposing a review program to encourage development of drugs for neglected diseases that became U.S. law in 2007.
david.ridley@duke.edu

—
Duke experts on a variety of other topics related the coronavirus pandemic can be found here.

News Tip: SCOTUS’ DACA Decision A Major Win for Young Immigrants, Experts Say

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday rejected by a 5-4 vote President Trump’s effort to end legal protections for young immigrants who are part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program (DACA) created in 2012 under the Obama administration.

Gunther Peck
Quotes:
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is terrific news for the families of immigrants who have undocumented members, DACA recipients, and citizens among them, the reality for millions of people across North America,” says Gunther Peck, an associate professor of history and public policy studies at Duke University. “It's a win for the hundreds of thousands of young people whose protection from deportation will remain in place, as well as for those families comprising citizens and non-citizens.”

“But the court did not in fact rule that DACA was above reproach, rather that the Trump administration’s efforts to end it had been ‘arbitrary and capricious.’ The Trump administration’s error, the court ruled, was procedurally unsound, a kind of power grab that violated institutional norms and administrative culture by not addressing the policy consequences of changing DACA.”

“In so doing, the court reframed the debate away from the question of ‘Should DACA recipients be citizens?’ to ‘What are the rules the executive branch must follow when making policy changes?’ ”

“No one disputed the executive branch’s right and capacity to administer or shape immigration law. Instead, the court ruled that American sovereignty must itself be process-driven, that bureaucracies have rights and norms which must be attended to. The implications of this ruling extend beyond the status of the undocumented then to the very nature of what ethical executive authority looks like.”

Bio:
Gunther Peck is an associate professor of history and associate professor of public policy studies, can discuss immigration policy, the history of human trafficking and its relationship to the evolution of racial ideology and humanitarian intervention.
https://history.duke.edu/people/gunther-w-peck

For additional comment, contact Gunther Peck at:
peckgw@duke.edu

—
Kate Evans
Quotes:
“Today, the Supreme Court delivered a clear win to immigrant youth in protecting DACA,” said Kate Evans, a clinical professor of law and director of the Immigrant Rights Clinic at Duke University School of Law. “The court recognized that in announcing its decision to end the program, the Department of Homeland Security had failed to consider its impact on the lives of the 700,000 people currently protected by DACA — individuals who have started businesses, entered degree programs, bought homes, will pay billions of dollars in taxes and are now parents of 200,000 U.S. citizen children. I am thrilled to see an opinion that protects students I teach and families we represent.”

“The decision comes after years of protests by young immigrants, their families and their allies. To honor today’s victory for DACA, the Trump administration should immediately reopen the program for new applications so that the thousands of young people who have graduated high school and entered college and have been unable to apply finally can. Additionally, Congress needs to take urgent action to create permanent protections for people with DACA.”

Bio:
Kate Evans is a clinical professor of law and director of the Immigrant Rights Clinic at Duke University School of Law. Previously, she had a private immigration practice focusing on appellate litigation.
https://law.duke.edu/fac/evans/

For additional comment, contact Kate Evans at:
evans@law.duke.edu

—
Media Contact:
Steve Hartsoe
steve.hartsoe@duke.edu
_ _ _ _

Duke experts on a variety of political topics can be found at https://communications.duke.edu/2020-election-experts/.

###

Want to Avoid Another Shutdown? Wear a Mask, Experts Advise

DURHAM, N.C. — If you’re in public and see someone wearing a mask, that person is doing it for your benefit.

So return the favor.

That was one of several themes to emerge Thursday from a media briefing featuring two Duke medical scholars with vast expertise in vaccines, immunology and the spread of infectious diseases like COVID-19.

Drs. Sallie Permar and Cameron Wolfe took questions for an hour on myriad issues. Here are excerpts:

ON WEARING MASKS IN PUBLIC

Dr. Cameron Wolfe, infectious disease specialist

“The scientific consensus is actually quite clear. The consensus exists on both the types of masks and their protective efficacy of the individual wearing it, and also the collective benefit for the community.”

“That second part has really not been emphasized sufficiently. People have sort of viewed a mask … as something designed to protect them. While that may be true in a hospital ward … in the community the drive is very clearly to protect everyone else.”

“We understand now very clearly this virus has a pre-symptomatic phase of shedding. Even though I may not be symptomatic today, even though I may have no idea of the fact I may become sick in a day or two … I can pass it to other people unwittingly. So my wearing a mask fundamentally protects you when I don’t know I’m sick or infectious. That part of the science is actually pretty clear.”

“The wearing of any mask, including cloth masks that folks will now see for sale widely, is very satisfactory at me preventing you getting sick. That’s the public health part of this. When I walk down the street wearing a mask, I’m doing that for other folk around me, not fundamentally for me.”

Dr. Sallie Permar, pediatric infectious disease specialist

“The data has really shown that wearing a mask and preventing those respiratory droplets from spreading on other people is really effective.”

“The masks are super useful in protecting those that you are around. You wear a mask to prevent infecting others. It does play some role in protecting yourself as well. When we think about requiring masks … I think it’s something that the benefit versus the inconvenience weighs towards the benefit.”

ON CONVINCING PEOPLE TO USE MASKS

Permar

“It’s hard to remember to wear a mask, and it’s uncomfortable, so the more you see other people doing it, the more you’ll be reminded to do it.”

“I went out and bought some designer masks. I think everyone can show their personality in what masks they choose. The more we require masks, the more it will become normal in our everyday lives.”

Wolfe

“A lot of it is about good leadership … and good example-setting. That is something I wish we could do better on as a community. We have almost politicized mask-wearing. That is some sort of dystopian reality where the wearing of a mask has become something that can be judged.”

“It comes from political leaders buying into this, it also comes from state and federal politics, with leaders visibly taking this to heart. That has not yet happened, and that needs to change if we want people to buy into this.”

ON WHETHER STATES WITH RISING COVID CASES SHOULD SHUT BACK DOWN

Wolfe

“Being prepared to put a pause on things should be the first step. I’m heartened that our state health departments are finally talking about the implications of what a pause to phase 3 for us would look like. If we consider ourselves to be data-driven and we see the data heading in the wrong way, it’s nonsense to think we can continue doing the same thing and expect that trajectory to change.”

“Re-crunching down can still be avoided if you put your efforts into the right mitigation strategies.”

“If you want to keep opening and if we want to allow businesses to function, an individual choice on behalf of our collective, for me to wear a mask, seems like a smaller move than closing down again.”

ON SCHOOL RE-OPENINGS

Permar

“School reopening is a really difficult decision that we’re facing. We will dig into the data that shows that children have a very different course of the infection. They are mostly asymptomatic. What’s really important to understand is how much do they transmit the virus? How much do they transmit virus to their peers? How much do they transmit virus to the staff and teachers? What about when we wear masks? Can we reduce that risk?”

“What I hope will transpire over the next couple months is the development of child-specific metrics. How many children who are presenting with routine health care test positive? How many children are testing positive in our community? Another example might be absenteeism for influenza-like illness.”

“What I hope is that the education leaders and the public health leaders can think about schools differently than how we treat bars and restaurants. The appropriate metrics for opening up the community in many places where adults are going to congregate — the number that are hospitalized, the percent testing positive every day — I don’t know (if) we should apply those same metrics to children and schools.”

“We know that as much as teachers try and as much as parents try, the virtual learning will not be the same, especially (for) the youngest children who really need the face-to-face interaction.”

On the dangers of quarantine fatigue in the citizenry

Wolfe

“Many of us, frankly, are starting to see some fatigue in the community. I think that fatigue expands to many things. It extends to mask-wearing, it extends to social-distancing fatigue. Those things have played into disease transmission. Unfortunately, the phased reopening has, I suspect, encouraged a little bit of a letdown of folks’ guard. You really are seeing that steady march of increasing cases, increasing hospitalizations. We’ve got to figure out a way to turn that around.”

On the short- and long-term effects of the pandemic on children

Permar

“I often think about what are going to be the impacts on children now and for the future. They are the ones who will be living with the impacts of this virus the longest.”

“It’s a respiratory virus where children are not often severely affected during the acute infection. However, one thing that has been very new and still developing is seeing this post-infectious syndrome that happens almost exclusively in children. There’s an inflammatory syndrome that can be very severe.”

“It can land children in the hospital. We’re still really understanding what that post-infectious syndrome is. But it has reminded us that children are not completely unaffected by this pandemic.”

“We know that despite them being a minority of the hospitalizations, they have been impacted majorly when it comes to their development, their education and even their routine health care that has fallen behind in this time.”

“As we look towards a vaccine, the vaccine is being developed at a most amazing speed. As a vaccinologist, I never thought I’d see a vaccine developed within a year. That’s being solely focused on adults, and I think we need to consider adding children to that vaccine development as well. We know children are the targets of most vaccines.”

“They, of course, are often routes to adults becoming infected as well. Adding children into vaccine development is very important for us to think about now rather than waiting until all adults are vaccinated.”

On what happens if people refuse the COVID vaccine

Wolfe

“I’d be naïve not to be concerned. I think it is going to be really incumbent upon public health leaders and federal government leaders to demonstrate a clarity of message here that needs to be uniquely available and visible to the public. Yes, I am worried about skepticism. We have to continue to reiterate active demonstrations of safety.”

Permar

“If we roll out a vaccine to a large percent of the population and then have a safety concern, that will diminish the faith in vaccines. While we’re going at this with the most rapid speed because the pandemic is not ending until we have a vaccine, we are also facing the challenge of making sure it’s the safest vaccine we can put out in a rapid fashion.”

Faculty Participants

Dr. Sallie Permar
Dr. Sallie Permar is a professor of pediatric infectious disease, immunology and molecular genetics at the Duke School of Medicine. Permar can address how COVID-19 affects mothers and children, how viruses transmit between people and general questions on vaccine development. Read her USA Today op-ed.
sallie.permar@duke.edu

Dr. Cameron Wolfe
Dr. Cameron Wolfe is an associate professor of medicine and who can discuss transplant-related infectious diseases, general infectious diseases, biological and emergency preparedness for hospital systems, and influenza and respiratory viral pathogens.
cw74@duke.edu

—

Duke experts on a variety of other topics related the coronavirus pandemic can be found here.

Price: Juneteenth to Be a Day of Reflection and the Beginning of Eliminating Racism

As Americans around the country celebrate the end of American slavery on Juneteenth this Friday, Duke President Vincent E. Price is asking the university to use the day as a moment of reflection on racism and as a starting point to do hard work to eliminate systems of inequality in the country and within the university.

“We must take transformative action now toward eliminating the systems of racism and inequality that have shaped the lived experiences of too many members of the Duke community,” Price wrote in an e-mail message that was sent to all members of the university community. “That starts with a personal transformation, and I’m prepared to do that work. It must end in institutional transformation, and that is the hard work before all of us. And that is my responsibility: to put my full energy as president behind that effort.

“That work begins today.”

Following a day-long symposium in which Black faculty, staff and students discussed their experiences with racism at Duke and in the country, Price’s message committed the university to several steps that will connect fighting racism with each of the five pillars of Duke’s strategic framework, Toward Our Second Century.

Among the steps Price cites are:

Empowering our people by expanding the diversity of our faculty, staff and students, with attention to increasing need-based financial aid and addressing salary equity issues and ensuring diverse leadership at all levels of the organization;
Transforming teaching and leadership by reviewing the curriculum, incorporating anti-racism lessons into it and ensuring every student leaves Duke with an understanding of the nature of structural racism;
Building a renewed campus community by requiring anti-racism and anti-bias training for all faculty, staff and students and providing greater support for those who are experiencing pain or trauma from racial injustice;
Forging purposeful partnerships within Durham to support struggling communities, create more economic opportunities for the local community and deepen ties with NC Central University, Durham Technical Community College and Johnson C. Smith University, a historically Black university connected to Duke through The Duke Endowment;
Activating our global network by strengthening outreach to alumni who are Black, Indigenous and people of color and creating significant connections between them and students on campus.

“These actions are only a starting point,” Price said. “Righting the wrongs of history will take time, and our efforts will need to be focused and sustained. We must also be far clearer about our goals and transparent as we work toward them.”

Price further said the university’s executive leadership will develop a structure for assessment, accountability and reporting on progress in these areas. The deans of the schools must have an implementation proposal by Sept. 1.=

“We cannot, on this Juneteenth, bring news of true freedom—freedom from oppression, violence, and systemic racism,” Price said. “In many ways, even after a century and a half, that goal sadly remains elusive. But today, we can bring news of Duke’s commitment to be partners on the path to achieving it, and to resolutely turn our attention toward the mission of anti-racism.”

Read the full statement from President Price here.

Duke Partners With Durham on Recovery Fund for Local Small Businesses

Duke University is partnering with the Durham City government to create a Durham Small Business Recovery Fund program for small businesses adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The fund consists of public funds for loans and private money for grants and is currently $2 million, with $1 million each from the City and from Duke University. This $1 million is part of a total $5 million expansion of the university’s Duke-Durham Fund, which includes financial support and technical assistance to non-profits, small businesses and community-based organizations.

The partnership signifies an important one between the city and the university. Supporting Duke’s home and its neighbors through purposeful partnerships is part of President Vincent Price’s strategic framework, Toward our Second Century.

“Duke values and relies on a rich diversity of small businesses to keep Durham thriving, and public-private partnerships like this help to support our community and quality of life for all,” said Stelfanie Williams, Duke vice president for Durham and Community Affairs. “We are pleased to collaborate with the City to provide grants to small businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.”

“Our goal is to create equitable access to these funds,” said Andre Pettigrew, director of the City’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development. “We expect these funds to be exhausted quickly, as has been the case with relief funds from local and federal sources.” Other funding is anticipated from other government and private sources in the coming months.

The fund will be held and administered by the Carolina Small Business Development Fund (CSBDF). In addition to administering the grants, CSBDF also will process, service and collect loans on behalf of the City. The agency will also market the programs and provide technical assistance to businesses receiving loans.

Eligible businesses are those with fewer than 25 employees, including home-based businesses and food trucks, which are subject to additional criteria. Businesses with revenue of less than $500,000 may apply for grants up to $10,000. Businesses with revenue of more than $500,000 are eligible for loans of $5,000 to $35,000 with a 3 percent interest rate and repayment terms up to 10 years. Borrowers will make interest only payments during the first year, with principal payments deferred up to a year.

Loan applications will be selected for review on a first come, first serve basis. Grant applications will be selected for review randomly to give smaller businesses time and equal opportunity to apply. According to CSBDF, which also administers a similar small business loan program for Mecklenburg County and a similar grant program for Raleigh, more than half of the grant and loan recipients in each program were businesses owned by people of color.

The application process for both grants and loans will begin on June 18, with the grant program application ending on June 28. Loan applications will be accepted until funds are exhausted. Grants will be disbursed on or around July 7, while decisions for loans will be made within 15 calendar days from receiving completed applications, with money provided five calendar days from the closing date.

For more information about the programs, visit www.carolinasmallbusiness.org/durhamgrantprogram and www.carolinasmallbusiness.org/durhamloanprogram.

News Tip: SCOTUS Ruling in Gay, Transgender Employees Case ‘The Right Result,’ Experts Say

DURHAM, N.C. — In a 6-3 opinion Monday, Justices Gorsuch and Roberts joined the more liberal wing of the Supreme Court in its opinion that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from firing workers on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Doriane Coleman

Quotes:
"The United States Supreme Court held that it is a violation of federal statutory law to fire someone from their job because they’re gay or transgender. This was the right result," says Duke University law professor Doriane Coleman. “In the usual case, being gay or transgender has nothing to do with a person’s ability to do their work, and so it is wrong to make employment decisions on these grounds.”

“Indeed, for too long, because people who are gay and transgender have been unable to get or keep jobs, they have been unable to sustain life’s basics – to take care of themselves and their families – simply because others were uncomfortable in their presence. The decision today makes plain that this discomfort and the economic marginalization that results are unlawful.”

“The way the court reached this result, through a literal interpretation of the word “sex,” has important implications for other kinds of cases. First, all nine justices agreed that the word ‘sex’ means the biological or reproductive classification that distinguishes males from females. And all nine agreed that sex is distinct from sexual orientation and gender identity. The majority – six justices – held that firing someone because they are gay or transgender requires taking into account their biological sex and it is this – taking account their sex — that literally violates Title VII.”

“In so holding, the majority declined both to expand the meaning of the word ‘sex’ to include sexual orientation and gender identity, and to extend ‘sex stereotyping’ theory to cover the particular facts at issue in the cases.”

“Second, the majority made clear that it was leaving for another day the decision on how federal law applies to decisions other than hiring and firing that were raised during oral argument and in public commentary. Specifically, because they involve different considerations, the court expressly left for another day the lawfulness of sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms, dress codes and sports. The justices in the majority did not express views about how they might decide such cases.”

“Academics, advocates and social media commentators on all sides of the issues in these pending cases will speculate. They’ll seek to spin the decision in Bostock so that it supports their positions. However, all that’s clear for sure is that the court isn’t willing to read ‘sex’ in existing statutory language beyond its traditional meaning.”

Bio:
Doriane L. Coleman, a professor of law at Duke University School of Law, specializes in interdisciplinary scholarship focused on women, children, medicine, sports and law. She can discuss sex, including its evolving definition and its implications for institutions ranging from elite sport to medicine and law.
https://law.duke.edu/fac/coleman

For additional comment, contact Doriane Coleman at:
dlc@law.duke.edu.

—
Trina Jones

Quotes:
"In a very dark moment in this country’s history, the Supreme Court today set forth a glimmer of hope," says Duke University law professor Trina Jones.

“The ruling is based largely on a textual reading of the word ‘sex’ in Title VII, with the court determining that distinctions based on sexual orientation and gender identity are ‘because of sex.’”

“To be sure, the employers in the cases argued for an interpretation of sex limited to 'reproductive biology,' whereas the employees argued that sex included 'broader norms' concerning gender identity and sexual orientation. The Court notes that 'because nothing in our approach to these cases turns on the outcome of the parties’ debate, and because the employees conceded the point for argument’s sake, that it would proceed on the assumption that “sex” 'refer[s] only to biological distinctions between male and female.' The Court then finds that it is unlawful discrimination because of sex to 'penalize men for being attracted to men and women for being attracted to women.' In addition, the Court notes that by discriminating against transgender persons, an 'employer unavoidably discriminates against persons with one sex identified at birth and another today.'”

"Those of us who write in this area were unclear about the probable outcome in the trilogy of cases the court decided today, because the court was interpreting a congressional statute and Congress has failed to pass legislation in recent decades prohibiting discrimination on these bases. Also, there was some division on this question within lower federal courts and governmental entitles like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Justice.”

“Although discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity were not contemplated by Congress in 1964, neither was sexual harassment. Yet, the court has extended the statute’s protections before to reasonably comparable evils. This is an extraordinarily wonderful — and somewhat surprising — outcome, and it is not an understatement to say that it is a landmark ruling.”

“The decision increases the possibility that the more than 8 million members of the LGBT community will be treated with the dignity and respect that people deserve in every aspect of life, and especially when they are simply trying to earn a living. This is a particularly significant ruling for the transgender community as this may be the first time the Supreme Court has acknowledged trans people and extended them any type of protection.”

“It is unclear how this ruling will affect interpretation of other federal statutes, like Title IX and the Fair Housing Act, where the word ‘sex’ also appears.”

Bio:

Trina Jones, the Jerome M. Culp Professor of Law at Duke University School of Law, specializes in racial and socio-economic inequality. She can discuss employment discrimination and federal law that prohibits discrimination based on race, sex, age, religion and disability.
https://law.duke.edu/fac/jones

For additional comment, contact Trina Jones at:
tjones@law.duke.edu

—

Media Contact:
Jeannie Naujeck
jeannie.naujeck@duke.edu

###

Eight First-Year Students Named University Scholars

DURHAM, N.C. — Eight incoming first-year students have been awarded the University Scholars Program Scholarship to pursue their undergraduate studies at Duke University.

The scholarships are awarded to students with an interest in interdisciplinary research, collaborative thinking and innovative academic pursuits.

The University Scholars Program covers the full cost of tuition, room, board and mandatory fees for four years of undergraduate education. Funding is also available for recipients to pursue domestic and international experiences, including opportunities for independent research both in the summer and during the academic year.

Based on estimated tuition rates over a four-year period, the scholarship is worth more than $315,000.

The Class of 2024 scholarship recipients are:

William “Colby” Cheshire from Mont Belvieu, Texas, a graduate of Barbers Hill High School Eight First-Year Students Named University Scholars

Aiden Fox from Boise, Idaho, a graduate of Capital High School Eight First-Year Students Named University Scholars

Foxx Hart of South Easton, Massachusetts, a graduate of Boston College High School Eight First-Year Students Named University Scholars

Alexia Jackson from Centennial, Colorado, a graduate of Eaglecrest High School Eight First-Year Students Named University Scholars

Nadeska Montalvan from Miami, Florida, a graduate of G. Holmes Braddock Senior High School Eight First-Year Students Named University Scholars

Yuna Oh from Apple Valley, California, a graduate of Apple Valley High School Eight First-Year Students Named University Scholars

Keri Tomechko from Akron, Ohio, a graduate of Revere High School Eight First-Year Students Named University Scholars

Amy Weng from Covina, California, a graduate of Troy High School Eight First-Year Students Named University Scholars

For more information about the University Scholars Program, please visit https://sites.duke.edu/dukeusp/.

Scholarship Honors Duke’s First African American Student Government President

DURHAM, N.C. — Four incoming first-year students have been awarded the Reginaldo Howard Memorial Scholarship at Duke University.

The award is given to incoming students who embody the qualities of Reginaldo Howard, Duke’s first African American student government president, including a commitment to academic achievement, leadership, community service and social justice.

The Reginaldo Howard Scholarship covers the full cost of tuition, room, board and mandatory fees for four years of undergraduate education.

Recipients are also given access to funding for domestic and international experiences, including opportunities for independent research both in the summer and during the academic year. The full value of each scholarship is estimated at more than $315,000 over four years.

The Class of 2024 recipients are:

Major Glenn of Memphis, Tennessee, a graduate of Houston High School

Major Glenn

Andrew Greene of Richmond, Virginia, a graduate of Deep Run High School

Andrew Greene

Sophie Johnson of Evanston, Illinois, a graduate of Evanston Township High School

Sophie Johnson

Kennon Walton of Cleveland, Ohio, a graduate of the University School

Kennon Walton

For more information about the incoming class of Reginaldo Howard Memorial Scholars, visit the scholarship’s website at http://www.ousf.duke.edu/page/rh.

Reimagining the Criminal Justice System

Broad criminal justice reform is needed to change policing in the United States, and it should originate at the local level, Duke scholars said Thursday.

Three Duke experts spoke to media Thursday about a variety of policy and reform issues as well as about what can be learned about policing at the nation’s founding.

Here are excerpts:

ON POLICING, DEADLY FORCE AND REFORM

Brandon Garrett, law professor

“Police in America have incredibly broad discretion to use deadly force. About 1,000 people are killed each year by police, making police violence a leading cause of death for black men in particular. This is a public health and civil rights crisis. It’s also a legal and cultural crisis.”

“The law is not particularly constraining of police. The Supreme Court has said that officers can basically react to potentially deadly situations based on what seems reasonable in the moment.”

“That shoot-from-the-hip approach has led to black suspects far more likely to be killed by police. George Floyd posed no risk to anyone when he was killed in the neck hold in Minneapolis. Tamir Rice had a toy gun when he was killed in Cleveland. We can go on and on.”

“We need to think more broadly about what is public safety. What do we need police for? And when is it appropriate to have armed people intervene in our society?”

“Our (Duke Center for Science and Justice) does work on use-of-force policy – and this is a deep legal and institutional and culture problem. A joint statement by our center, with others, including collaborators on ALI Principles – sent this out in a Changing the Law to Change Policing statement yesterday.”

ON WHAT ‘DEFUND THE POLICE’ MEANS RIGHT NOW

Darrell Miller, law professor

“The question about ‘defund the police’ is about what the slogan means. Unfortunately, I think it’s got so much meaning it really doesn’t work effectively as a slogan. Defund the police, at its most useful and constructive, is a request to totally re-think how we do policing in America. Who does it, with what kind of tools, where, under what circumstances. It’s about re-deploying resources to other non-policing functions that are also social services like job training, substance abuse programs, domestic violence prevention work.”

“Because it’s a slogan and easily misunderstood, it’s easily misunderstood to mean ‘abolish the police.’ I really think that will be detrimental to Black Lives Matter and to black lives in general.”

“I think that will empower and embolden vigilantes, people who will engage in armed self-help in the way that led to the deaths of Trayvon Martin 10 years ago and Ahmaud Arbery earlier this year.”

“The issue about abolishing the police or dis-establishing the police has the potential to abolish the one police function that’s politically accountable. If someone designates himself as an armed neighborhood watchman and stops me, I don’t have any control over that person. I can’t make them wear a body camera. I can’t make them engage in de-escalation techniques. … I don’t even know who to file a report with.”

“With a police force that is taxpayer-supported, that is politically accountable, I have some control as a voter and a taxpayer over what kind of force is being used in my community.”

ON HOW OUR NATION’S FOUNDERS ENVISIONED POLICING

Laura Edwards, history professor

“At the time of the nation’s founding, policing as a term was used broadly to refer to ‘governing.’ “

“It was about resolving a wide range of problems and injustices, and everybody had responsibility for policing in this broad sense. And everyone could draw on police powers as well, and that was particularly important for people who were unequal, who were on the margins of society, who could then call on government and their authority to back them in various complex problems in their lives. We tend to forget all that today.”

“We think of policing now only as police forces of uniformed officers. But that didn’t exist in the 18th and early 19th century. And we think policing only refers to crime, but that was not what policing was about then. It was about this broader sense.”

“It was written into our constitutional order. … States delegated authority to local governments so people could participate actively in the policing of their communities.”

“People have the constitutional authority to hold modern-day police forces accountable. But they also have more power than that. They have the right to actually hold and define how government uses police powers, and to what end.”

“This is important because police powers are actually about more than crime and criminals. They’re about resolving conflicts. They’re also about addressing the problems of people in trouble. They’re about rectifying deep-seeded injustices.”

“The past tells us that policing isn’t an either/or issue. It’s not that you do it or don’t to it. It’s actually about how we do it and that really is about our constitutional order.”

ON HOLDING POLICE ACCOUNTABLE

Garrett

“It’s very, very hard to hold police officers liable, even in fatal shootings captured on video. … Because police benefit from another layer of benefit of the doubt, reasonableness, what could they do in the circumstances? They have to make split-second decisions. That’s sort of the tenor of a lot of the reasoning of federal judges.”

“Also important, though, is internal accountability within police departments. Police discipline. Police policies matter even though they’re just on paper because if police officers do something to violate their policies, something should happen.”

ON THE LIKELIHOOD OF REFORM FIRST AT THE LOCAL LEVEL

Miller

“I think we’re seeing it already. To the extent that some of the demands of activists in the streets over the last few days are actually percolating to thought leaders, to political leaders. Some of the proposals for police reform … are already being drafted as draft legislation in Congress. Abolishing qualified immunity for police officers, conditioning funding for local police on keeping accurate records on use of force or discriminatory policing.”

“To the extent that there are truly groups that truly believe that police are not needed, they are also active. I am doubtful that as a nationwide matter we will see the widespread disestablishment of police. But if local communities, in Minneapolis or Seattle, want to take some or all of the ‘defund the police’ rhetoric and implement it as policy, they have the ability to do so. I just hope they choose wisely when they end up making these demands into policy.”

ON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REFORMING POLICE

Garrett

“I think we do need to rethink what we need police for. What the structures are for policing agencies. Why do we so often arrest people? Why do we so often place people in jail, which we didn’t even just a few decades ago? During COVID, urgent new questions have been asked about why people end up in jail for petty crimes, largely due to the inability to afford cash bail.”

“Policing agencies are needed in many places for public safety, obviously. But there are lot of very small police agencies that can’t possibly follow best practices or have good training. We need to consolidate police departments.”

“We need to revise criminal codes and consider decriminalizing (some) offenses. We don’t need to be arresting people, let alone holding them in neck holds, for using a counterfeit $20 bill.”

ON HOW POLICING WAS SEEN POSITIVELY EARLY IN US HISTORY

Edwards

“At our founding, policing had very broad and positive connotations. We now associate all these negative connotations to it in the sense that we associate it with police forces that are separate from people and are enforcing laws and trying to root out crime. It’s become a very negative kind of thing.”

“People imagine policing in the past to be simply about militias. But militias were actually organized to address specific threats, and were very temporary, and then disappeared after the threats were gone.”

“Ordinary people, marginalized people could also use police powers to address what they saw as the major issues and problems in society. I think we’re missing that part of it. Historically, police powers belonged to everyone.”

ON ONE POSITIVE CHANGE YOU’D LIKE TO SEE RIGHT NOW

Garrett

“I’d like to see comprehensive, state-level police reform and criminal justice reform legislation in states like North Carolina.”

“We need comprehensive reform. … We need to be looking to our local elected leaders to make deep change.”

Edwards

“I’d like to see us think about the protesters and also their demands as what is a part of our original constitutional order, and return to that, and what we see now with the way … police forces are acting, and what they’ve become, is actually aberrant, what is actually a move away from the original constitutional compact.”

Miller

“The fact that we’re at a moment, I think, where people really do recognize … that this is a problem, that this is a problem that needs to be addressed, that America is not living up to the best version of itself, and that some kind of real, substantial, data-driven changes are available and can be implemented soon – I hope people will recognize the magnitude of this moment.”

The experts:

Laura Edwards
Laura Edwards is a professor of history at Duke University. Her areas of expertise include women’s history and legal history, including history of the law in the 19th century South and the legal history of policing. She is the author of several books, including “A Legal History of the Civil War and Reconstruction: A Nation of Rights.”
ledwards@duke.edu

Brandon Garrett
Brandon Garrett is a law professor at Duke University and a leading scholar of criminal justice outcomes, evidence and constitutional rights. Garrett’s research and teaching interests include forensic science, eyewitness identification, corporate crime, constitutional rights and habeas corpus and criminal justice policy. He is the author of five books.
bgarrett@law.duke.edu

Darrell Miller
Darrell Miller is a law professor at Duke University who specializes in civil rights, constitutional law, civil procedure and state and local government law. He also co-directs the Center for Firearms Law at Duke. Miller is the co-author of “The Positive Second Amendment: Rights, Regulation, and the Future of Heller” (2018).
dmiller@law.duke.edu

Alumni Scholarships Fund Independent Research for Two First-Year Students

DURHAM, N.C. — Two incoming first-year students have been awarded the Alumni Endowed Undergraduate Scholarship to pursue their undergraduate studies at Duke University. The Duke Alumni Association established the scholarship in 1979 to recognize the academic and personal achievements of children or grandchildren of Duke alumni. Alumni Scholarships Fund Independent Research for 2 Incoming Students

The scholarship covers the full cost of tuition, room, board and mandatory fees for four years of undergraduate education. Funding is also provided for domestic and international experiences, including opportunities for independent research both in the summer and during the academic year. The full value of each scholarship is estimated to be more than $315,000 over four years.

The Class of 2024 recipients are:

Sean Fiscus of Lavale, Maryland, a graduate of Mercersburg Academy
Emma Martinez-Morison of Louisville, Kentucky, a graduate of Dupont Manual High School

For more information about the Alumni Endowed Undergraduate Scholars, visit the scholarship's website at http://www.ousf.duke.edu/page/Alum.

### Alumni Scholarships Fund Independent Research for 2 Incoming Students