Schedule of Events

In California’s warm, dry climate, where fire is native to the landscape, it is unrealistic to try to prevent it. Prescribed burning is one of the most effective ways to build fire resilience because it mimics the natural fire regime in a controlled, manageable way. For thousands of years, Indigenous people in California set purposeful fires that served to both clear fuel from the land and to enhance the growth of culturally significant endemic plant species. However, the United States government stopped Indigenous people from using the land in their traditional ways, including carrying out cultural burns, and eventually removed them from the land entirely. Fire suppression became the dominant land management paradigm, and it is one of the major causes of California’s current wildfire problem. The purpose of this study is to evaluate how public land management agencies have or have not taken advantage of prescribed/cultural burning as a fire resilience strategy, and to assess Indigenous representation and power in prescribed fire operations. To do so, this study uses qualitative data collected from interviews with content experts and relevant site visits. Restoring beneficial fire to California’s landscapes is important for fire resilience, but given its cultural importance, it is essential to create opportunities for Indigenous people to be involved and to lead. Ultimately, the objective is to maximize both fire resilience and equity by incorporating principles of Indigenous environmental justice into land management practices.

In June 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued its ruling in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, where it concluded that there is no constitutional protection of abortion. This landmark decision reversed nearly fifty years of precedent established by the cases of Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), which previously affirmed abortion as a constitutionally protected right. As a result of the Dobbs decision, the authority to regulate abortion returned to the states, leading to significant policy variation across the United States. Furthermore, abortion policies have significant implications for social and economic participation, particularly for young women and minorities. Given the wide-reaching impact of abortion policies, this study examines how Dobbs influenced political mobilization and engagement by comparing public opinion in 2022 and 2024 across demographics. The findings suggest abortion has become an important issue for many voters following the decision, with a majority expressing support for legal access to abortion in both years. These attitudes were consistent across gender, age, and racial groups, though variation existed in intensity of support and perceived importance. In 2024, this public sentiment contributed to the passage of seven state-level ballot measures that expanded protections for abortion in various states.

The Supreme Court's landmark decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022) overturned nearly fifty years of precedent established by Roe v. Wade, eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion and returning the issue of abortion regulation to individual states. This literature review project analyzes the political consequences of the Dobbs ruling, arguing that Dobbs has not only intensified partisan polarization but has also triggered a broader struggle over democratic participation and civil rights in the United States. The findings of this study are synthesized from leading legal, public opinion, and policy sources, and demonstrate how abortion attitudes now function as a primary marker of partisan identity, with striking demographic divides along racial, geographic, and ideological lines. This review reveals a strategic alignment between reproductive restrictions and voter suppression, showing that states enacting abortion bans are often the same states implementing restrictive voting laws. This disproportionately disenfranchises and harms women of color who are more likely to live in states with bans on reproductive freedoms and face barriers to political participation. Furthermore, an analysis of the 2024 election cycle reveals an electoral landscape showing strong public support for abortion access has driven significant mobilization, yet its impact at the ballot box is often hindered by competing concerns such as that of the country's economy. The post-Roe era is thus defined by the intersection of reproductive rights, voter access, and racial equity, posing an array of questions for the future of what American democracy will look like.

This study examines counselor perspectives on Camp HOPE, a week-long program for youth exposed to domestic violence. Through surveys of 14 counselors, we investigated perceptions of program effectiveness and how counselors' own Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) influence their work. Results show strong consensus on the program's effectiveness. Notably, counselors who believed they facilitated hope, healing, and resilience "extremely well" all had multiple ACEs, suggesting shared experiences enhance effectiveness. Counselors regardless of ACE background reported personal healing through their service, indicating reciprocal therapeutic benefits.
 
Through our research we hope to contribute to the literatures on  trauma-informed programming for youth, to improve the effectiveness of Camp HOPE and to inform decisions about future program development for the Ventura County Family Justice Center.