# data[].attributes.body
What are the effects of incorporating student voice initiatives into the college classroom

# data[].attributes.body
pedagogy
"voice initiative"
"higher ed*"

# data[].attributes.body
2010-2020
United States
Higher Education
English

# data[].attributes.body
Can you think of different key words I can use?

# data[].attributes.body
Karen's research process

# data[].attributes.body
How does eating organic fruits and vegetables aid in healing the body from illnesses?

# data[].attributes.body
"eating" "organic" "fruits" "vegetables" "human health"

# data[].attributes.body
2010-2020

# data[].attributes.body
What other filters should I use to narrow my search?

# data[].attributes.body
My computer doesn't support the use of a microphone so I am typing this submission in replace of speaking:
After watching all of the videos on how to navigate the library database, I tried to use the same processes but am having a difficult time finding more than a couple reliable sources that pertain to my research question.

# data[].attributes.body
How has the use of plastic affected marine life in the last 10 years?

# data[].attributes.body
"marine life" "plastic pollution" "10 years"

# data[].attributes.body
2010-2020
United States

# data[].attributes.body
“Help Save the Oceans - Say No to Plastic.” Record, The (Kitchener/Cambridge/Waterloo, ON), 26 June 2018. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=n5h&AN=Q4KRKON2018062646585988&site=ehost-live.

# data[].attributes.body
What are different keywords I can use to help find more sources?

# data[].attributes.body
What are the main causes of water pollution in America?

# data[].attributes.body
"main causes"
"water pollution"
"America"

# data[].attributes.body
2010-2020
United States

# data[].attributes.body
"Water Pollution." Gale Encyclopedia of American Law, edited by Donna Batten, 3rd ed., vol. 10, Gale, 2010, pp. 328-332. Gale eBooks, https://link-gale-com.libdbmjc.yosemite.edu/apps/doc/CX1337704622/GVRL?u=modestojc_main&sid=GVRL&xid=47fef1b1. Accessed 28 Sept. 2020.

# data[].attributes.body
What other filters should I apply for my research?

# data[].attributes.body
What are the effects of homeless people in the United States?

# data[].attributes.body
"Effects" "Homeless" "United States"

# data[].attributes.body
1968-2020
United States

# data[].attributes.body
The only thing I can think of is If you guys have any key words for me to help my research process.

# data[].attributes.body
How does immigration policy in the U.S effect the lives of migrant agricultural workers from Mexico?

# data[].attributes.body
"United States"
"immigration Policy"
"Human rights"
"Mexico"
"farmworkers"

# data[].attributes.body
2018-2020
2001
in the U.S
in California
scholarly

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Highlights

*

State-level immigration and immigrant-focused policies influence Latino health.

*

Policies aimed at undocumented immigrants 'spill over' and affect all Latinos.

*

State-level immigration policies shape Latino health through four pathways.

*

Pathways include racism and access to institutions, healthcare, and material goods.

Abstract

There has been a great deal of state-level legislative activity focused on immigration and immigrants over the past decade in the United States. Some policies aim to improve access to education, transportation, benefits, and additional services while others constrain such access. From a social determinants of health perspective, social and economic policies are intrinsically health policies, but research on the relationship between state-level immigration-related policies and Latino health remains scarce. This paper summarizes the existing evidence about the range of state-level immigration policies that affect Latino health, indicates conceptually plausible but under-explored relationships between policy domains and Latino health, traces the mechanisms through which immigration policies might shape Latino health, and points to key areas for future research. We examined peer-reviewed publications from 1986 to 2016 and assessed 838 based on inclusion criteria; 40 were included for final review. These 40 articles identified four pathways through which state-level immigration policies may influence Latino health: through stress related to structural racism; by affecting access to beneficial social institutions, particularly education; by affecting access to healthcare and related services; and through constraining access to material conditions such as food, wages, working conditions, and housing. Our review demonstrates that the field of immigration policy and health is currently dominated by a "one-policy, one-level, one-outcome" approach. We argue that pursuing multi-sectoral, multi-level, and multi-outcome research will strengthen and advance the existing evidence base on immigration policy and Latino health.

View full text

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
State-level immigration and immigrant-focused policies as drivers of Latino health disparities in the United States

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
State-level immigration and immigrant-focused policies influence Latino health. * Policies aimed at undocumented immigrants 'spill over' and affect all Latinos. * State-level immigration policies shape Latino health through four pathways. * Pathways include racism and access to institutions, healthcare, and material goods.

# data[].attributes.body
Does anyone use any specific sites to look for scholarly articles? I have always just used google.

# data[].attributes.body
What are the overall effects of the rights that have been granted to people of the LGBT community in the United States in the last ten years?

# data[].attributes.body
“LGBT Rights”

“Human Rights”

“Impacts”

# data[].attributes.body
People of the LGBT community

2010-2020

United States

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Roughly half of Americans think federal law bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Despite four years of nationwide same-sex marriage, despite rapidly growing cultural acceptance for LGBTQ people, despite extensive annual Pride celebrations-these Americans are wrong. Now that all of this summer's glitter floats have been dismantled and the rainbow confetti has been cleared, lawyers, legislators, and judges have turned back to the ongoing fight over whether federal law does, and should, specifically protect LGBTQ people from being fired, denied a rental lease, or refused service because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

This year will mark several important milestones in the battle over LGBTQ discrimination. In the spring, the House of Representatives passed the Equality Act, a sweeping bill that would prohibit anti-LGBTQ discrimination in all aspects of public and commercial life, without any religious exemptions. While the bill has basically no chance of gaining traction in this Senate, if Democrats sweep Congress in 2020, it will likely be high on the party's priority list. In the fall, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case R. G. & G. R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC & Aimee Stephens, about a former funeral director who was fired after coming out to her employer as transgender. The justices will consider whether existing workplace protections in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 already cover discrimination on the basis of gender identity.

And yet, the legal status of LGBTQ rights remains murky. As the movement has gained cultural momentum, activists have largely moved away from a posture of compromise-they believe they can win full protections for LGBTQ people in any context, without exceptions. A small but significant group of conservative religious leaders has been working the middle ground, trying to build support for a bill that would protect LGBTQ people but leave space for institutions, such as Christian colleges and Catholic hospitals, to operate according to their religious teachings. But they've faced resistance from their right, with prominent pastors and conservative legal groups opposed to any kind of bill that would mark sexual orientation and gender identity as special legal categories.

As America has largely moved on from its gay-rights moment, with many Americans believing everything got taken care of with same-sex marriage, legal advocates on both sides have been left with bitter disagreements about where the country should go next-and the possibility that the status quo will perpetually remain in place.

Americans don't agree on whether LGBTQ discrimination actually happens. Conservative advocates argue that LGBTQ people face little to no discrimination, and that their identities have been normalized-LGBTQ folks are featured on TV shows and in movies, and many businesses have voluntarily crafted their own nondiscrimination policies. Ask LGBTQ people themselves, however, and they consistently see discrimination in their daily lives: A recent study from the Williams Institute at UCLA found that lesbian, gay, and bisexual people reported much higher rates of being bullied, fired, or denied a job, promotion, or lease compared with heterosexual people. In a 2015 survey of transgender Americans, 30 percent of respondents with jobs reported experiencing workplace discrimination of some kind within the prior year; a quarter said they encountered some form of housing discrimination.

Still, these experiences can be subtle or hard to document. And the incentives for bringing a formal, legal complaint vary wildly, depending on where someone lives: 20 states fully prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, while 28 states don't. (Two others-Wisconsin and Utah-bar some kinds of discrimination, but not others.) "Because it doesn't look just like Jim Crow," said Doug NeJaime, a law professor at Yale University who focuses on LGBTQ legal issues, conservatives argue that "it then doesn't merit attention." But, he said, "there's lots of reasons why discrimination against LGBT people looks different than other forms of discrimination ... [That] doesn't mean it's not discrimination that needs to be remedied."

Early legislation proposing civil-rights protections for gays and lesbians was often hedged: Advocates focused on issues such as workplace discrimination, where they thought they had a greater chance of victory. Roughly five years ago, however, the strategy among advocates began to shift: Public perception had become much more favorable, and leaders believed they could set more ambitious political and legal goals. Activists began calling for a comprehensive bill without religious exemptions.

As all of this was happening on the legislative side, the courts were also working through what the law already says about LGBTQ rights. In the past 30 years, the Supreme Court has ruled sex stereotyping illegal; declared sodomy bans unconstitutional; struck down state measures blocking civil-rights protections for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals; and, of course, legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states. But even as the inevitability of legalized gay marriage was becoming clear in the early 2010s, "the narrative really began to take hold that you could be married on Sunday and fired on Monday and lose your housing on Tuesday," Sarah McBride, the national press secretary at the Human Rights Campaign, a prominent LGBTQ-rights advocacy group, told me. "That really brought into starker contrast the absurdity of the lack of explicit protections."
Read: How gay marriage became a constitutional right
This question has been particularly fraught for transgender people, such as the plaintiff who will go before the Supreme Court this fall. LGBTQ legal advocates have argued with mixed success that sex stereotyping, or discriminating against people based on their failure to live out societal norms for men and women, necessarily includes discrimination against transgender people. They argue that those who discriminate against transgender people because of their gender identity are already breaking the law-a claim the Supreme Court will soon consider in the Harris Funeral Homes case.

Because advocates are arguing that trans protections already exist in the law, but still need to be written into the law via the Equality Act, some critics have accused them of hypocrisy. Activists "are talking out of both sides of their mouths," wrote Greg Baylor, the senior counsel for government affairs at the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal firm that advocates for religious liberty, in an email. "While arguing in court that Title VII already includes sexual orientation and gender identity, they are simultaneously urging Congress to add these categories."

Mara Keisling, the head of the National Center for Transgender Equality, told me she is "confident the courts will eventually come down on our side." Until that happens, however, "we do need these laws to explicitly name us, if for no other reason than it is better public education," she added. "And public education is one of the most important parts about ending discrimination."

Ironically, as LGBTQ rights have expanded, it has become harder for advocates to make their case to the public. Before the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage, "people could see very clearly the fact that same-sex couples couldn't get married," McBride said. "People have a more difficult time understanding the way civil rights work in our country, the absence of protections." The movement has also developed powerful allies from Wall Street to Hollywood, and those alliances have been used against advocates. "The way in which the business community has embraced LGBT rights has played into the narrative that some on the right want to put out, which is that the LGBT community is not some vulnerable minority," NeJaime said. "The irony about antidiscrimination laws is: Vulnerable groups don't get protected until they're actually ... [able to] muster the political power to gain momentum."

Still, that momentum has redoubled the resolve of LGBTQ activists. Maybe they won't win at the Supreme Court this time, or get nondiscrimination legislation passed through this Congress. But, they believe, theirs is a cause of progress. They will eventually win it all.

And that has left a number of their opponents very, very nervous.

When the Equality Act passed in the U.S. House of Representatives this spring, there were no amendments on the floor-it was just an up or down vote. "It's what a lot of people would call a messaging bill," said Tyler Deaton, a Republican strategist who works with GOP politicians to support LGBTQ rights. It was a powerful message indeed. The legislation won the vote of every Democrat in the House who participated in the roll call, along with eight Republicans-a clear sign of its broad support. The bill also sent another message: The days of compromise are over.

In recent years, claims of LGBTQ rights have been repeatedly brought into direct conflict with claims of religious conscience. Just this week, the Trump administration proposed a new rule that would allow federal contractors to make hiring and firing decisions based on their religious beliefs and practices; progressive advocates believe the rule will be used to target LGBTQ people. The most notable court cases have involved wedding vendors: conservative, religious cake bakers, photographers, and florists who don't want to participate in same-sex wedding ceremonies. The outcomes of these conflicts have been mixed, but they've made progressive LGBTQ advocates even more determined to eliminate the "gaping religious exemption," as McBride put it. The Equality Act specifically bars any group from using the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, known as RFRA, to try to opt out of the bill's protections.

For religious groups and institutions that teach that homosexuality is a sin, and that men and women were created as such by God, the prospect of this kind of legislation is worrying. "It would be years of litigation-that's what we would look forward to under the Equality Act as currently drafted," Shirley Hoogstra, the president of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU), told me. For the nearly 140 Christian institutions that are members of her organization, she said, the bill "would put federal funding, it would put accreditation, it would put hiring rights, it would put campus student-life policies all at risk." Fundamentally, these kinds of groups want to be able to preserve what they see as religious integrity in their own spaces-and they object when that is described as bigotry. "The Equality Act as currently drafted has caused Christian institutions to really wonder about whether their particular educational contribution is valued in America," Hoogstra said.

Hoogstra has been part of a coalition pushing an alternative to the Equality Act called Fairness for All. Her organization, along with groups such as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Seventh-day Adventists, believes federal LGBTQ discrimination protections are inevitable-the Equality Act's passage "was a proof point," Hoogstra said. They want the final law, whenever it passes, to reflect their needs. Broadly speaking, Fairness for All-style legislation would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, but provide exceptions for certain religious institutions, including schools-much like exceptions that were written into parts of the original Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

So far, this effort has not won any of the public Republican support necessary to make Fairness for All a plausible competitor to the Equality Act. Many Republicans may not see this as a worthwhile way to spend political capital, or remain opposed to establishing any LGBTQ rights in federal law. But the bill's boosters still see the possibility of a strong coalition between religious-freedom advocates and LGBTQ-rights supporters. "If you canvass LGBT activists or professional LGBT organizations, some of the people that are the most favorable ... are heads of equality organizations in red states," said Tim Schultz, the president of the First Amendment Partnership, a group that has worked on crafting consensus between LGBTQ-rights advocates and religious conservatives.
Read: How Trump is reversing Obama's nondiscrimination legacy
LGBTQ people in these states generally have no legal recourse against discrimination outside of local and municipal ordinances, which provide only a patchwork of protection. Jeff Graham, the executive director of Georgia Equality, an advocacy group in the state, said he doesn't necessarily support sweeping religious exemptions, but "I do support us being in dialogue and having a respectful conversation with people of faith ... We need to make sure that small-business owners understand that there is not a big agenda out to ... hurt them or their businesses."

Before Fairness for All has truly even launched, however, those seeking an accord have faced major backlash from their backyard. When the evangelical World Magazine broke the news that the CCCU and the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), which claims to represent roughly 45,000 churches, had voted to support the Fairness for All effort, a prominent group of conservative religious leaders signed a letter of condemnation. Laws that provide specific protections for sexual orientation and gender identity "empower the government to use the force of law to silence or punish Americans who seek to exercise their God-given liberty to peacefully live and work consistent with their convictions," they wrote, and "treat reasonable religious and philosophical beliefs as discriminatory." The signers included Franklin Graham, the evangelist Billy Graham's son, who has been known to make inflammatory comments about homosexuality; but also Russell Moore, the head of the Southern Baptist Convention's political arm, who is often seen as a moderating voice in the evangelical world. The NAE has since backed away from full support, citing its "desire to appropriately acknowledge and respect differences among evangelicals."

All of this complicates the picture of what might come next. If the Democrats make a full electoral sweep in 2020, holding on to the House, taking back the Senate, and winning the White House, it seems likely that the Equality Act will be on their agenda-and it's unlikely the party's leadership will be open to finding a middle ground. Meanwhile, the groups totally opposed to this kind of legislation are preparing for legal war. The hard dichotomy between religion and LGBTQ rights is false-a majority of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people are themselves religious, and many faith groups welcome and affirm them in their congregations. When it comes to the legal and legislative battlefield, however, that nuance all but disappears.

It's as true in culture as it is in physics: For any action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, and America seems to be going through one such moment now. In the past five years, public support for people refusing to serve LGBTQ people when it violates their religious beliefs has crept up steadily: Almost a third of Americans, and nearly half of Republicans, say this should be legal, compared with 16 percent and 21 percent, respectively, in 2014. The story of the LGBTQ movement has lately been one of triumph, but it's not clear whether that will continue. Graham, of Georgia Equality, told me he believes some kind of federal legislation will eventually protect LGBTQ people from discrimination, "but I'm not optimistic that it will happen quickly," he added. In this political environment, the possibility of moderation and dialogue seems almost antiquated. "It really feels," he said, "like everything is a battle for the soul of the nation."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
significant group of conservative religious leaders

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
America Moved On From Its Gay-Rights Moment-And Left a Legal Mess Behind

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Roughly half of Americans think federal law bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Despite four years of nationwide same-sex marriage, despite rapidly growing cultural acceptance for LGBTQ people, despite extensive annual Pride celebrations-these Americans are wrong.

# data[].attributes.body
Can you think of any supporting questions that I can incorporate into my writing that are related to my primary research question?

# data[].attributes.headline
I have two topics in my head, and still haven't decided which one is better. 

# data[].attributes.subject
I have two topics in my head, and still haven't decided which one is better. 

# data[].attributes.body
1. What is the difference between organic and regular products in USA market?
2. Why woman handling the main household tasks in USA

# data[].attributes.body
1. Chemical; kids; myths.
2. Kids; cleaning; work.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Animal products; plant products; side effect.
2. USA; female; 2020; statistic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Story Highlights

Women mainly responsible for laundry (58%), cleaning and cooking (51%)

Men take lead on keeping car in order (69%) and doing yardwork (59%)

Perceptions about who does certain household tasks differ sharply by gender

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Although women comprise nearly half of the U.S. workforce, they still fulfill a larger share of household responsibilities. Married or partnered heterosexual couples in the U.S. continue to divide household chores along largely traditional lines, with the woman in the relationship shouldering primary responsibility for doing the laundry (58%), cleaning the house (51%) and preparing meals (51%). At the same time, men continue to take the lead in keeping the car in good condition (69%) and doing yardwork (59%).

In addition to laundry, cleaning and cooking, women are the primary decision-makers when it comes to home decor in 62% of households. Although there is more equity in some of the other tasks, women are also much more likely than their husbands to care for children on a daily basis, shop for groceries and wash dishes.

There is only one task that men and women are equally likely to take the lead on -- paying bills. In 37% of U.S. households, the woman primarily pays the bills, while in 34% of households, the man does.

Planning family activities is the only task that is reported as being shared equally by a majority, 52%. In households that don't share the job, women are more likely to be responsible (37%) than are men (10%).

Half say that decisions about savings or investments are shared equally, but in most other households (31%), it's the man making these decisions.

These latest readings, based on combined data from three polls conducted in mid-2019, mark the third time that Gallup has asked married and cohabitating couples to report who is most likely to perform various tasks in their household. The previous readings were in 1996 and 2007. Analysis of the 2019 data is limited to heterosexual couples (97% of the sample) to facilitate comparison with past data collected before same-sex marriage was legal.

Distribution of Household Tasks Has Become More Equitable Since 1996

Although women remain more likely than men to perform most of the duties at home, this has declined in some cases over the past two decades. Since 1996, women have become less likely to be the primary partner handling grocery shopping (down 14 percentage points), laundry (down 12 points), cooking (down 12 points), dishwashing (down 11 points) and cleaning (down nine points). These shifts are accompanied by some combination of increases in the percentage of men primarily performing the tasks or sharing the work equally with their partners.

Women also have become less likely to be the main spouse to pay bills as more have said this job is now shared equally between partners.

Over the same period, men have become more likely to take over the decision-making about savings or investments (up five points), and they have steadily remained most likely to keep both the car and yard in good condition.

Husbands and Wives See Things Differently

The above findings are based on the views of all married or cohabitating heterosexual couples. However, perceptions about who does what differ sharply by gender. Specifically, for eight of the 12 tasks -- caring for children, cleaning the house, preparing meals, washing dishes, grocery shopping, paying bills, planning family activities and making decisions about savings or investments -- men and women are each more likely to say that they personally perform an equal or larger share of the work than their partner does.

Who is more likely to do each of the following in your household?

Parents' Household Tasks Tied to Employment and Earnings

Although mothers are more likely than fathers to say they perform most of the housekeeping chores, the division of labor among parents with at least one child under the age of 18 at home varies largely on each parent's employment situation and earnings.

For example, among parents in single- and dual-income households:

In households where both parents work, men shoulder slightly more of the burden of chores than do men in single-income households.

Although women in both types of households are still more likely to be responsible for laundry, meal preparation, dishwashing and cleaning, men in dual-income homes pitch in slightly more on these chores than do men in single-income homes.

When it comes to caring for children, a plurality of adults in dual-income homes report sharing the responsibilities of childcare. This compares to a majority of mothers in single-income homes who care for children.

Who is more likely to do each of the following in your household?

And when looking at parents' individual earnings in dual-income households:

In households where the father earns more than his wife, the wife is more likely to take the lead on the core housekeeping tasks of laundry, cooking, cleaning, dishwashing, grocery shopping, decorating and childcare. When the mother's income is higher than her husband's, he takes on a greater role in all of these tasks.

When both parents earn roughly the same income, men are more likely to help with taking care of children, washing dishes and cleaning.

In households where one parent earns more than the other, that person is more likely to be responsible for paying the bills, but long-term financial decisions about savings or investments are most likely to be shared regardless of who the chief earner is.

Who is more likely to do each of the following in your household?

Direct Link Between College Degree and Household Roles

Women with a college degree are slightly less likely than women without one to be solely responsible for several domestic tasks, including laundry, cleaning, washing dishes and caring for children. This may be because women with a college degree are much more likely than those without one to be working full time and thereby sharing the household responsibilities more.

Men with a college degree are more likely than those without one to be solely responsible for the family's finances -- both paying bills and making decisions about savings or investments.

Who is more likely to do each of the following in your household?

Younger Couples Maintaining Traditional Gender Roles

As was the case in 2007, married couples of different ages are strikingly similar in their reports about the division of jobs in their homes.

The only task for which there is a significant difference by age is paying household bills. A 39% plurality of those aged 18 to 34 say both spouses share this responsibility equally, while those aged 35 to 54 are divided and a 44% plurality of those aged 55 and older report that the wife is responsible for the bills.

Bottom Line

Despite some changes over the past two decades, the division of labor in U.S. households remains largely tilted toward traditional stereotypes: Women are more likely than their husbands to take care of the house and children, and men remain the primary caretakers of the car and the yard.

As working women and mothers continue to struggle for equal treatment at work, they are more likely than men to fulfill many core housekeeping tasks at home. Yet, there are some signs that women's roles, particularly those whose salaries match or exceed their husband's, are more equitable.

A recent Gallup poll found that a record-high percentage of women prefer to be in the workforce than at home, which could portend greater shifts in household responsibilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Women Still Handle Main Household Tasks in U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Story Highlights Women mainly responsible for laundry (58%), cleaning and cooking (51%) Men take lead on keeping car in order (69%) and doing yardwork (59%) Perceptions about who does certain household tasks differ sharply by gender WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Although women comprise nearly half of the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
I currently have two topics in my head. Any idea which would be better?

# data[].attributes.body
What are the effects of social media on today's youth?

# data[].attributes.body
"social media"
"mental health"
"adolescents"

# data[].attributes.body
2010-2020

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4183915/

# data[].attributes.body
How does immigration laws impact undocumented students at UC or CSU campuses in California?

# data[].attributes.body
undocumented students
higher education
equality rights
immigrants reform laws

# data[].attributes.body
2010-2020
College campuses
California

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The chancellor of California State University pledged Wednesday that campus police officers and the university's legal staff will provide guidance and assistance for students who are approached by immigration officials while on college campuses.

Chancellor Timothy White's statement is in response to President Donald Trump's announcement earlier this week of a broad crackdown on illegal immigration, including a threat to deport millions of undocumented residents.

White's memo, addressed to students, faculty and staff of the 23-campus, 460,000-student system, is the latest in a growing chorus of denunciations of federal immigration policy coming from California's public colleges and universities. The University of California and California Community Colleges have also issued strong statements vowing to protect undocumented students. Altogether, the three college systems serve nearly 3 million students.

White's memo this week instructs students to immediately contact campus police if they're approached by federal, state or local officials asking about their immigration status. Campus officers will serve as a liaison with the outside officials, and will contact the university's Office of General Counsel for guidance regarding immigration law.

"California State University is committed to being an inclusive and welcoming institution of higher education that is enhanced by our global community," White wrote. "As such, we will continue to make every lawful effort to provide a safe and welcoming campus environment for all our students, faculty, staff, alumni and members of our community."

California State University is the largest university system in the country. Students are not required to list their immigration status when they apply, but staff estimate that about 8,000 students in the system are undocumented, based on the number of requests for out-of-state tuition waivers, according to CSU spokesman Mike Uhlenkamp.

So far, immigration officials have not come to campuses looking for undocumented students, Uhlenkamp said. Federal policies dating from the early 1990s have made schools, hospitals, places of worship, clinics and protest rallies a low priority for immigration agents, and enforcements at those sites have been rare.

And Trump so far has not made changes to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, which protects undocumented young people who arrived in the country before age 16 and are enrolled in school.

But announcements like White's are nonetheless important, said Jessica Hanson, an attorney with the National Immigration Law Center, based in Los Angeles.

"Informing students of what's happening in Washington, and letting them know how the school system is going to respond, does make a difference," she said. "I think it's great CSU is doing this."

Statements like White's are also important symbolically, she said. As the Trump administration's anti-immigrant rhetoric has escalated, anxiety and anger has spread among immigrant communities, especially on school campuses, she said. Knowing your school will do what it can to protect undocumented students can bring students some degree of comfort, she said.

"(Trump's immigration policies) have had a devastating effect. People are really afraid, and they're mad," she said. "And they're torn, because they want to protest but they're afraid to stand up for fear of being targeted."

White has issued strongly worded statements vowing to protect immigrants before. In November, he told the CSU Board of Trustees that campus police would not enter into agreements with local, state or federal officials to enforce immigration laws.

On Jan. 30, he issued a statement condemning Trump's order to ban travel from seven Muslim-majority countries. The ban was later struck down in court, but Trump has said he will soon introduce a new one.

Trump has insisted that the nation's security requires deporting undocumented residents, building a wall to secure the southern border and more closely vetting immigrants.

"We are deeply troubled by President Trump's recent executive order that stands in stark contrast to the fundamental tenets of the California State University. We believe in the free exchange of ideas globally, central to which is our ability to welcome and interact with those from around the world," White wrote. "When something threatens our ability to think beyond our borders and learn from the world as a whole, we will oppose it. When something impacts anyone in our CSU community - especially the most vulnerable - it impacts us all."

White's counterparts at the University of California and California Community Colleges also have come out strongly in favor of protecting immigrants.

The Community College Board of Governors, which advises and sets policy for the state's 113 community colleges, in January passed a resolution stating the chancellor's office would not release students' identification data to immigration officials or cooperate with potential federal efforts to create a registry based on religion, nationality, sexual orientation or any other protected characteristic.

UC President Janet Napolitano, who served as Homeland Security secretary under President Barack Obama, this week called Trump's immigration orders "a step backward" that will "stoke fear and anxiety in immigrant communities across the nation, making immigrants - whether here legally or undocumented - much less likely to work with local law enforcement to help keep our communities safe," according to the Los Angeles Times.

In January, she and the chancellors for all 10 UC campuses issued a statement blasting Trump's travel ban, and in November she issued a "statement of principles," saying that UC supports undocumented students and campus police will not enter into agreements with immigration authorities.

At CSU, White's statements are intended to comfort students who might feel nervous or angry about shifts in federal immigration policy, Uhlenkamp said.

"We want all our students to feel safe and welcome," he said. "Our business is not to enforce immigration law or policy; it's to provide a high-quality education to our students."

Despite the pro-immigrant statements from school authorities, federal immigration agents can still come on campus and detain students if the agents have a warrant signed by a judge, Hanson said.

She said the best option for undocumented students and their families is to learn their rights, organize with fellow students, lobby school authorities to declare their schools sanctuaries, and hold administrators accountable for enforcing policies meant to protect undocumented students.

"I advise everyone to attend a 'know-your-rights' workshop," Hanson said. "Everyone has certain constitutional rights, regardless of their immigration status. Knowing those rights is probably the biggest thing anyone can do to protect themselves."
To get more reports like this one, click here to sign up for EdSource's no-cost daily email on latest developments in education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
California State University extends protections for undocumented students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The chancellor of California State University pledged Wednesday that campus police officers and the university's legal staff will provide guidance and assistance for students who are approached by immigration officials while on college campuses. Chancellor Timothy White's statement is in response to President Donald Trump's announcement earlier this week of a broad crackdown on illegal immigration, including a threat to deport millions of undocumented residents.

# data[].attributes.body
This topic has been talked about a lot. Any ideas how I can help mine stick out?

# data[].attributes.body
In what way can I rephrase the key words and filters?

# data[].attributes.body
How can we do our part and help prevent environmental degradation in marine life?

# data[].attributes.body
impact on coral reefs
marine life
climate change

# data[].attributes.body
2000-2020
ocean life
how we can help

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The threats faced by our ocean planet may seem overwhelming. In the face of pollution, climate change, overfishing, and other daunting problems, what you can do on your own may seem like a drop in the bucket. But if we begin working together now, we can make a huge difference. Here are some ways to get started:

Make the Connection
The first step in making a difference is learning about the ocean and how your actions have an impact. Keep reading to learn everyday things you can do to help protect and restore the seas. And don't forget to share what you've learned with friends and family.

All water on Earth is connected. Even if you don't live near the coast, water that goes down your drain or runs off from your yard can eventually make its way into the ocean. The Mississippi River, for example, is like a giant funnel collecting water from thousands of smaller rivers and streams. It drains 41 percent of the continental U.S. into the Gulf of Mexico. Because of run-off from farms and fields, the Gulf now experiences large annual dead zones, or areas with so little oxygen that sea life cannot survive there. You can help keep the ocean-and other waterways-healthy by reducing your family's use of chemicals inside and out.

On the table: Look for fruits and vegetables that are grown without pesticides (and don't spray them in your own garden). Pesticides contain toxins that can run off into the sea and harm marine life. Also look for produce grown in season and close to where you live. A lot of energy is wasted in transporting foods from far away or growing them in greenhouses at the wrong time of year. See tip number five below to find out how our energy use affects the ocean.
Trim Down Trash
Remember that trash we "throw away" doesn't disappear. And moving water-whether waves on the beach, the stream running through your neighborhood, or rainwater flowing toward the storm drain-can carry loose trash to the ocean. Garbage, especially plastic, is a major hazard for marine animals. Sea birds, turtles, seals, and other animals can mistake floating plastic for food or become tangled in it and die. Help prevent this by curbing your family's throwaway habits.

Garbage patrol: Never litter (inland, on the beach, or from a boat), and participate in beach or waterway clean ups to help stop the flow of trash into the ocean.

When it comes to many of our once-favorite seafoods, there aren't plenty more fish in the sea. In fact, scientists estimate that up to 90 percent of large predatory fish (those that eat other animals-and usually end up on our dinner plates) have disappeared since humans began heavy fishing. Marine animals are also caught and sold for aquariums and as souvenirs. You can avoid trouble by only buying products that you know were sustainably harvested. (Sustainable means that the species can maintain a healthy population and the natural balance is not disrupted by harvesting.

Choose pets carefully: If you have a salt-water aquarium, make sure you ask where and how the animals you buy were collected. Look for the Marine Aquarium Council's Certification in pet stores to find animals that were carefully harvested and well cared for. And never release an unwanted pet into the ocean or any waterway. Organisms that don't belong can crowd out the locals and disrupt the ecosystem.

Select sea-friendly souvenirs: Steer clear of jewelry, mementos, and products made from marine animals or animal parts, including shells and-especially-coral.

When we burn fossil fuels (like oil, gas, or coal) to power our homes, businesses, and cars, we are adding the gas carbon dioxide to the air. The blanket of carbon dioxide we've been building for over a hundred years acts like a greenhouse, trapping more of the sun's heat. More heat means a warmer ocean, which is taking its toll on marine life. It also causes the ocean to become more acidic, which makes it hard for organisms like corals and clams to build their skeletons and shells. You can help slow global warming and ocean acidification by reducing your "carbon footprint"-the amount of carbon dioxide released as you go about your daily activities.

A trip to the beach or out on the water to snorkel or fish is a great way to learn more about the ocean and celebrate all it does for us. But when you visit, make sure you are not causing harm. Remember that every terrain is important to marine life-and to us!

On the sand: When walking on sand dunes, be careful of any grasses and plants growing there. Living plants help hold sand in place. Dead plants and seaweed provide fertilizer. Both should be left alone.

In the shallows: On rocky shores, the shallow "tidepools" that are exposed when the tide is out, can be a great place to look for interesting marine life. But be careful not to trample on these fragile critters and their homes. Look, but don't touch.

Near the reef: When snorkeling or diving, never touch the reef! Corals and other animals are fragile and easily killed by a grasping hand or careless flipper. Also never feed or handle marine animals.

In open water: When boating, be very careful where you anchor. Anchors can scar reefs and rip out seagrass beds, which provide food and shelter for many species. Where permanent anchoring buoys are provided, use them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The threats faced by our ocean planet may seem overwhelming. In the face of pollution, climate change, overfishing, and other daunting problems, what you can do on your own may seem like a drop in the bucket. But if we begin working together now, we can make a huge difference.

# data[].attributes.body
What filters can I use to get a more specific search?

# data[].attributes.body
How have the roles of teachers promoted sustainable living and higher education in their students?

# data[].attributes.body
How can the world reduce the negative affects of global warming?

# data[].attributes.body
Global Warming
Health
Benefits
Climate Change

# data[].attributes.body
2010-2020
United States
China

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/climate-environment/climate-change-america/

# data[].attributes.body
What other filters can you use to allow for a broader search?

# data[].attributes.body
Does wealth aid segregation?

# data[].attributes.body
Social Classes
Oppression
Wealth Distribution

# data[].attributes.body
1913-2020
United States

# data[].attributes.body
For my research question would it be better to talk about just the US or other countries as well?

# data[].attributes.body
What difference in air pollution in the United States and Thailand?

# data[].attributes.body
"difference" "air pollution" "United States and Thailand"

# data[].attributes.body
2010-2020
United States
Thailand

# data[].attributes.body
What causes the air pollution in the United States and in Thailand?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Thai Officials Close Schools As Toxic Air Pollution Chokes Bangkok : NPR

# data[].attributes.body
How has the pandemic Coronavirus increased the discrimination against Asian people in America?

# data[].attributes.body
"Coronavirus" "discrimination" "Asian people" "America"

# data[].attributes.body
2020
United States
Asian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Stop the coronavirus stigma now- Nature Research Journal

# data[].attributes.body
Does my question make sense? What filters should I add?

# data[].attributes.body
"high cost" "high rent" "housing" "Bay area"

# data[].attributes.body
How are marine life affected by plastic waste in the ocean? Specifically sea turtles.

# data[].attributes.body
“plastic waste” AND “sea turtles” AND “pacific ocean”

# data[].attributes.body
Full Text
Scholarly
2000-2020

# data[].attributes.body
2000-2020
California
Full text
Scholarly

# data[].attributes.body
My question would be how far do I go on this topic. Do I inform what types of sea turtles are affected or sea turtles as a whole and go on from there?