The Ford School of Public Policy 

and Education Policy Initiative held 

a seminar Wednesday afternoon to 

discuss findings on how the 2014 Flint 

water crisis impacted educational 

outcomes 
for 
younger 
children. 

During the discussion, the experts 

shared research findings nearly eight 

years after the crisis began, followed 

by a discussion on the larger real-world 

impacts on today’s youth. 

Public policy professor Brian Jacob 

led the talk and began by discussing 

the timeline of the Flint water crisis. 

He said despite previous insistence 

from public policy officials who said 

the water was safe to drink, it wasn’t 

until 2016 when the crisis was declared 

a state of emergency.

Mona Hanna-Attisha, a professor at 

Michigan State University who helped 

to uncover the water crisis, Kevelin 

Jones, Flint Community Schools 

Superintendent, 
and 
Sam 
Trejo, 

assistant professor of sociology at 

Princeton University, were also invited 

to discuss the impacts on K-12 students 

within the community. 

As the superintendent of the 

district, Jones said he had personal 

experiences dealing with the water 

crisis and emphasized the significant 

amount of time it took away from 

teaching.

 “I used to drink water out of 

the water fountain at my school 

with no problem and be able to just 

enjoy my life,” Jones said. “As the 

superintendent, it’s very difficult to 

know that I walked the halls of these 

same schools as a young man and 

graduated from Flint Community 

Schools and is now watching children 

have to be careful with drinking 

water. Being the principal, my job is to 

educate scholars and motivate them to 

learn, but now I have to father, and I 

have to say don’t drink that. We had to 

change the way we lived in the school.” 

Hanna-Attisha also explained her 

experience as a pediatrician giving 

advice to mothers. She began her own 

research once she heard there was a 

possibility of lead in the water. Her 

research was what helped to uncover 

the water crisis. 

“The day after releasing our 

research and the state went after me 

and said I’m wrong, the Flint schools 

said no, we’re protecting kids and shut 

off their drinking fountains” Hanna-

Attisha said. 

Rackham student Eneida Hysi 

attended the event and said the 

information was eye-opening for how 

the crisis affected student learning.

“The impacts on education were an 

aspect I hadn’t really thought about,” 

Hysi said. “My understanding was in 

regards to the physiological effects.” 

Trejo said that research from the 

water crisis showed that there was an 

increase in school-aged children with 

special needs, and Hanna-Attisha also 

shared research that supported these 

findings. 

“When we look at special needs, we 

see an increase in them moving from 

before the crisis to after the crisis,” 

Trejo said. “There was about a 9% 

increase in special needs.”

LSA senior Dilpreet Kaur, a member 

of the Flint Justice Partnership, helped 

coordinate the event and spoke on the 

importance of spreading awareness.

“You don’t necessarily have to 

belong to that community to be able 

to speak on it,” Kaur said. “One thing 

(the speaker) did mention was coming 

into communities. For me, (I want to 

continue) going into the community 

and helping in any way I can.” 

Hanna-Attisha 
discussed 
the 

importance of learning about the 

water crisis and how it is not just a 

trivial story. 

“What happened in Flint is not just 

a story about this one city north of here 

that had this water problem and there 

was this big injustice,” Hanna-Attisha 

said. “It was really an everywhere 

story. It’s about inequity, it’s about 

disinvestment in public health, it’s 

about deteriorating infrastructure, 

it’s about environmental injustice, it’s 

about democracy, it’s about science.” 

Two men convicted in August 

for their role in the plot to kidnap 

Gov. 
Gretchen 
Whitmer 
were 

denied a new trial Friday in an 

order from Judge Robert Jonker 

of the U.S. District Court for the 

Western District of Michigan. A 

jury convicted Adam Fox and Barry 

Croft of conspiracy in an August 

retrial following a mistrial in April. 

In his ruling, the Court found 

there was insufficient evidence to 

pursue allegations of juror bias or to 

convene a new trial.

Lawyers for Croft and Fox 

claimed there was juror bias and 

that Jonker unfairly targeted the 

defendants while presiding over the 

second trial. In his opinion Friday, 

Jonker disputed these allegations, 

pointing to the court record and 

declaring his actions did not arise 

to the level of judicial bias.

“Neither 
the 
authority 
nor 

the facts cited by Defendants 

establish the appearance of judicial 

bias requiring a new trial,” the 

opinion read. “The Court was 

quick to express frustration with 

both parties when it believed the 

party was wasting the jury’s time 

unnecessarily; the Court did not 

single out the defense.”

The first trial took place in April, 

nearly two years after the plot was 

uncovered and during that trial, 

the jury convicted two of the other 

conspirators in the plot. They were 

unable to come to a unanimous 

verdict for Croft and Fox, however, 

resulting in a mistrial. The Attorney 

General continued to press charges, 

so the pair were tried again in 

August. During the second trial, 

Fox and Croft were convicted 

of conspiracy and conspiring to 

obtain and use weapons of mass 

destruction. 

In their request for a third trial, 

attorneys for Fox and Croft reiterate 

allegations made in the second trial 

that a juror in the second trial was 

eager to be on the jury because 

they were “far left leaning.” In 

the 
opinion, 
Jonker 
dismissed 

these allegations as insufficient to 

warrant a new hearing.

News
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

GOVERNMENT

Ford School hosts panel examining lasting repercussions of past contamination

 ISABELLA KASSA
Daily Staff Reporter

NEWS BRIEFS

4 — Wednesday, December 7, 2022

 Judge denies third trial in Whitmer kidnapping plot

Co-conspirators to face sentencing Dec. 28

While climate policy is hotly 

debated in national politics, many 

programs 
at 
the 
University 
of 

Michigan have been incorporating 

sustainable 
initiatives, 
reducing 

greenhouse 
gas 
emissions 
and 

minimizing waste sent to landfills. 

One of these programs includes the 

Department of Theatre & Drama at 

the U-M School of Music, Theatre & 

Dance (SMTD). 

Music, Theatre & Dance senior 

Jordan Pinet has been studying 

theatre design and production at the 

University for four years, focusing 

particularly on stage management. 

She recently looked into the school’s 

theater program to evaluate if the 

theater productions are sustainable.

Pinet conducted an independent 

research study, which has not yet been 

published, about theatre sustainability 

during the summer of 2021 to 

understand how theatre programs 

can become more sustainable. Pinet 

conducted her research within the 

Department of Theatre & Drama, 

studying 
different 
shops 
within 

theater production and their efforts to 

become more sustainable in addition 

to what needs to be improved.

She found that the University 

is 
effective 
in 
incorporating 

environmental 
sustainability 
but 

often overlooks other important 

aspects of sustainability, such as social 

sustainability. Based on her research, 

Pinet said theater programs need to 

focus more on social sustainability 

because burnout is a relevant and 

widespread issue in theatre.

“I did some research this past 

summer, specifically an independent 

study about theater sustainability, 

looking into how we move past just 

environmental sustainability,” Pinet 

said. “Sustainability is talked about 

as this three-branch concept, where 

environmental sustainability is one 

part of that, but there’s also social and 

economic sustainability.”

Pinet 
said 
her 
findings 

revealed how the University takes 

sustainability 
into 
account 
for 

necessities like props, costumes and 

lighting by reusing or refurbishing 

costumes and props and switching 

to LED lights and motion sensors in 

dressing rooms. Pinet said financial 

and labor limitations prevent further 

options to explore sustainability. 

Pinet said she understands the 

difficulty of achieving sustainability 

within a university because of the 

frequent turnover of students and 

staff. 

“Something that I think a lot of 

places, 
including 
(U-M) 
theatre, 

(should consider is): How do you 

put policies and practices in place 

so that the sustainable things you’re 

doing now keep happening even 

when people change?” Pinet said. 

“Especially with things like student 

(organizations), where the entire 

organization is run by people that’ll be 

gone in four years?”

NEWS

Community members call on school to increase reuse, laud existing efforts

 RACHEL MINTZ
Daily Staff Reporter

CAMPUS LIFE

University of Michigan students 

don’t just have the football team to 

cheer for. Earlier this month University 

debate duo LSA junior Kelly Phil and 

LSA senior Rafael Pierry won the 66th 

annual Franklin R. Shirley Classic 

with an undefeated record of 11-0.

The tournament, hosted by Wake 

Forest University, is considered the 

fall championship due to its status as 

the last debate tournament of the fall 

collegiate schedule. Phil and Pierry 

went on to beat teams from institutions 

such as Harvard, Dartmouth and 

Emory, winning the tournament with 

a final win over host Wake Forest 

University.

This season is the first in which 

Phil and Pierry have worked together 

as debate partners, and Phil said she 

thinks they work well together as a 

team.

“He’s very motivated to win the 

national championship from March, 

and last year I wasn’t as successful as 

him,” Phil said. “Being partners with 

him this year, it’s reminded me that 

this is kind of the year where I can also 

win it all. And that’s really motivated 

me as well. So because our goals are 

aligned, it’s been really easy to work 

together.”

Aaron Kall, the debate director 

for the University, said he was 

thrilled with the pair’s performance 

throughout the fall semester. 

“I’m elated with the performance, 

just given that it’s such a major 

tournament, and it’s the last major 

tournament of the first semester,” 

Kall said. “So it really provides a lot 

of momentum for us heading into the 

second semester.”

Pierry said their performance 

from the tournament gives them 

a confidence boost as he and Phil 

prepare for the next semester of 

tournaments.

“It’s really nice getting to spend 

that Winter Break period, where 

you’re preparing for the next wave 

of tournaments, coming off a good 

result,” Pierry said. “It’s also good 

because it solidifies the perception 

that you’re doing well amongst the 

debate community as a whole. They 

remember us as the team that won the 

last tournament, so it’s a good feeling 

to close out strong.”

Phil said the victories this semester 

have helped take a weight off her 

shoulders going into Winter Break.

“It really feels like we’ve ended the 

season on a good note and going into 

Winter Break, we can really know that 

we’re in the best position we can be,” 

Phil said. “So it takes a lot of weight 

off of our shoulders, I think, whereas 

if we didn’t do as well, then going into 

Winter Break, we would have to try 

really hard and make up for whatever 

we didn’t do this semester.”

The pair currently have a 41-4 

record entering the winter semester.

Phil said the debate team has 

given her a lot of opportunities 

throughout her time at the University 

and encouraged students from a wide 

range of backgrounds and majors to 

look into the team. 

“There were some members of 

the debate team that were computer 

science majors and math majors in 

the past,” Phil said. “So I don’t think 

it’s completely incompatible with the 

subjects that (different students) might 

be interested in.”

Phil said the current debate topics 

often overlap with the interests of 

STEM majors.

“I had to learn from the ground up 

what all these basic AI concepts were,” 

Phil said. “Whereas if you’re already 

a computer science major, then it’ll 

probably be way easier for someone 

to really learn and understand a topic 

much faster. So I think, especially 

this year, there are a lot of topics that 

overlap with what STEM majors might 

be interested in.”

Pierry 
said 
they 
were 
not 

intimidated by the prestige of their 

competition, which included teams 

from Ivy League universities such as 

Harvard and Dartmouth who have 

previously won the championship.

“(Kelly and I) tend to know most 

of our competitors at an individual 

level, so we don’t really think of them 

as the school,” Pierry said. “We know 

them; we’ve debated them many 

times before. I think we’ve debated 

Dartmouth something like five or 

more times this semester alone. So I 

wouldn’t really say it’s intimidating.”

Phil said she didn’t have any doubts 

about her and Pierry’s performance 

before any matches.

“I think that while going into the 

tournaments, there haven’t been any 

big doubts,” Phil said. “In terms of skill, 

we felt pretty confident that we could 

do well.”

Phil and Pierry compete in Policy 

Debate, a form of debate in which 

competitors propose policies related 

to a topic, which remains the same for 

the entire year. This year, the topic was 

extending legal personhood, the idea 

of having rights and responsibilities 

in the legal system. Pierry said he and 

Phil focused on artificial intelligence 

when arguing in favor of the topic. 

He said their argument focused on 

making AI liable for crimes. 

“I think we approached it pretty 

creatively given what the topic has 

presented us,” Phil said. “(We) made 

a lot of new arguments before other 

teams had in terms of new frontiers 

for AI rights and duties … I think all in 

all, we’re really taking advantage of the 

broad nature of everything we can do 

with the resolution.”

UMich Debate Team wins fall semester national debate championship 

Policy duo conquers tournament at Wake Forest University

JOSHUA NICHOLSON
Daily Staff Reporter

Design by Evelyn Mousigian

SMTD students, faculty reflect on sustainability
Lead in the water: What are the 
educational impacts on Flint students?

José Brenes/Daily

Erin Posas reports on her personal experience through COP27 at the Talkback even at the Michigan League Thursday evening.

MADDYN SHAPIRO & 
HANNAH YORAN
Daily News Contributors

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

The University of Michigan Law 

School announced on Nov. 20 that it 

will no longer participate in the law 

school ranking process by the U.S. 

News & World Report. 

In the statement, Dean Mark 

West declared that the Law School 

would be exiting the ranking 

following other top-ranked law 

schools that have opted out of the 

ranking, such as Harvard and Yale. 

West wrote that the U.S. News 

report does not align with the 

values of the Law School and no 

longer serves its original purpose. 

He added that there are other 

valuable resources available for 

students when comparing different 

law schools, including the American 

Bar Association. 

“Over time, I increasingly have 

come to believe that the U.S. News 

law school rankings no longer 

serve the public interest,” West 

wrote. “This information (from 

the American Bar Association) 

dramatically 
and 
admirably 

increases 
transparency: 
It 
is 

available for free, and reflects 

informed thinking about what 

information is most important and 

relevant.”

West cited concerns about the 

methodology and algorithm of the 

rankings process, which he said is 

often hidden from participating law 

schools. U.S. News relies on surveys 

of faculty members from each law 

school — though Michigan will no 

longer be participating. 

U.S. News & World Report will 

likely continue to rank Michigan 

and other law schools without 

the insight of faculty surveys, 

West explained, and will rely 

exclusively on public information 

to rank the schools.

“I recognize, of course, that U.S. 

News and other organizations will 

continue to rank law schools, and 

that our rank may fluctuate based 

on differences in methodologies,” 

West wrote. “No matter. We will 

continue to focus on providing 

the best legal education possible 

and supporting our community — 

including especially the people-

centric 
factors 
that 
rankings 

struggle to measure.”

Second-year 
Law 
student 

Alexander 
Gavulic, 
a 
CSG 

representative, said he was not 

surprised that Michigan decided 

to drop out of the U.S. News 

rankings after hearing that other 

top-ranked 
schools 
had 
also 

dropped out. Gavulic said the 

reception among law students 

was somewhat varied, adding that 

some questioned the potential 

for ulterior motives among Law 

School faculty. 

“I myself am not entirely sure 

how I feel because I see both 

sides of it,” Gavulic said. “The 

administration’s viewpoint seems 

pretty clear as to why they’re 

removing themselves.”

Gavulic said he feels this decision 

will not have a severe impact on the 

Law School and students in the 

near future, as high-ranked schools 

such as Michigan will retain their 

reputation as elite institutions. 

“I don’t think that this is going 

to 
substantially 
impact 
hiring 

practices or even people looking 

to apply to the Law School just 

because I think it’ll still be viewed 

as a top tier law school, regardless 

of what U.S. News says,” Gavulic 

said. 

LSA sophomore Ruby Alseikhan 

plans to apply to law school 

and was excited by the school’s 

announcement. She said the U.S. 

News rankings have a negative 

impact on the application process 

for many pre-law students. 

“I’m really proud to go to a school 

that’s helping to realign the core 

values of the legal community,” 

Alseikhan said. “The U.S. News 

rankings in particular carry a lot 

of weight for those applying to 

law school, regardless of if (the 

ranking is) a true reflection of the 

education.”

CARLIN PENDELL
Daily Staff Reporter 

U-M Law withdraws from nationwide rankings

School joins others in leaving U.S. News and World Report list alleging unrepresentativeness

ACADEMICS

Read more at MichiganDaily.com