Small heat shock proteins (sHSPs) fall into a class of proteins known as protein chaperones, molecular tools that help prevent aggregation, an often-unhealthy phenomenon in which proteins clump together. This protection against aggregation plays a critical role in helping to prevent diseases such as cataracts, and may play a role in preventing neurological diseases associated with protein aggregation such as Alzheimer's disease or Parkinson's disease. Yet little is known about the mechanism by which sHSPs prevent misfolded proteins from aggregating. The study of this mechanism is significantly complicated by the dynamic nature of sHSPs; rather than having just one structure, these protein chaperones fluctuate between several different stable structures. The purpose of this research project was to see what insights into sHSP structure and function could be gleaned by simplifying this dynamic structure. We focused on the central region of a small heat shock protein, known as the alpha-crystallin domain (ACD). Individual ACDs associate to form dimers in an antiparallel fashion, and in doing so form a central fold known as the dimer-interface groove. In a typical wild type small heat shock protein, these ACDs would continuously slide against each other along this groove. We created three distinct cysteine mutations in the ACD of the small heat shock protein HSPB5, producing the R116C, E117C, and F118C mutants. We expected each of these mutant dimers to form a disulfide bond tethering the two ACD subunits of the dimer together at the dimer interface groove, preventing them from sliding against each other, and therefore locking the dimer's central region into one of three distinct conformations. Additionally, we expected the affinities of other proteins for the mutants' dimer-interface grooves to differ between mutants, giving us insight into how the conformational state of the ACD affects its ability to interact with other proteins.

Climate change is one of the most difficult legal challenges that the world faces today. Courts face new threats in combating climate change while interpreting legislation, previous case law and scientific evidence. Climate change includes issues regarding human rights, immigration rights, resource and land rights and native rights. New Zealand’s courts are limited by parliamentary sovereignty and cannot interpret the law in ways that invoke new legislation. Despite this, New Zealand’s legal system has played a critical role in climate change adaptation and policy innovation. In this project, I examine the use of the New Zealand Court system to better understand how the country is taking on the challenges climate changes poses. The project analyzes how the Environment Court tackles issues of climate change cases regarding land usage and resource management. However, it is important to discuss how the higher courts, the Court of Appeals, the High Court and the Supreme Court, settle climate change related disputes that exceed the jurisdiction of the Environment Court. All of New Zealand courts stay within the constraints of parliamentary sovereignty as they face a variety of issues resulting from climate change. To do this, I develop an original dataset. The data is from Environment Court cases, ranging from 1999 to 2021. The cases are coded to examine the court's response to these cases while taking into account the various impacts of climate change including land usage, pollution, and coastal erosion. Some cases from the higher courts are acknowledged in sections of the paper due to the importance of the case. First findings suggest that the court stays within the limits of parliamentary sovereignty and increases the legitimacy of future climate change litigation. The research at hand provides valuable insight on what future cases will cover and how courts around the world will respond.

Three different regimes have governed Bolivia within the past two years. Two of the regimes, the Morales and the Arce regimes, have been aligned with the Movement for Andean Socialism, a leftist party whose largest voting block is indigenous Bolivians. The other, the Áñez regime, was an interim government led by a right-wing alliance. This research examines the effect each regime has had on both indigenous rights litigation and the treatment of indigenous parties within the legal system. The analysis identifies how the three regimes interacted with the Bolivian legal system to affect indigenous rights. To explore this dynamic, the research develops an original case law dataset examining indigenous rights cases before the Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal of Bolivia from 2009 to 2021. Utilizing case law analysis, the study explores the extent to which the Tribunal’s decision constrains or empowers the regime in power. Finally, it analyzes the three regimes’ uses of the legal system to determine the extent of indigenous persecution or empowerment in each of the three regimes. Preliminary findings suggest that rulings during the Evo Morales regime had the most consistently favorable outcomes for indigenous rights, even in rulings which constrained the Morales government. While there is a dearth of cases before the Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal during the Áñez regime due to its short length, I provide additional data on lower-level court cases, use of prosecutors, and arbitrary detentions during this period to reveal the severity of indigenous persecution. I raise broader questions of judicial capture and regime change and both the promise and limitations of courts as an avenue for indigenous rights protections, and contextualizes comparisons between the legal systems of the three regimes within an understanding of the struggle for indigenous rights and related race and class based conflicts in Bolivia.

Emerging from past authoritarian regimes, it has not always been easy for developing democracies to maintain democratic rule in government institutions. However, for countries like South Korea, whose citizens are skeptical towards government actions due to a history of corruption, they hold a lot of faith in their judicial institutions as defenders of societal interests and democratic rule. To better understand the role of the judiciary in upholding democratic ideals in newer democracies, I study the Constitutional Court of Korea (CCK). Utilizing a sociolegal approach, I analyze how the CCK maintains legitimacy as the people’s court in upholding democracy. To answer this question, I create a unique dataset of the Court’s case law from 1995-2019 focusing on a case study of gender equality and political affairs. Through case law analysis, I analyze the Court’s efficacy in expanding non-traditional rights focused on gender equality and forming decisions that emphasize a separation of powers which limits political corruption. Preliminary findings reveal that the CCK has not hesitated to uphold democracy and holds widespread societal support as a proactive, accessible legal institution that is independent from other government influences. This research opens avenues to better comprehend the role of courts and their actions in rising democratic societies. Additionally, observing institutions like the CCK and their practices may serve as an example on a global scale of how courts play a role in preserving democratic norms.

Gentrification is characterized by the influx of wealthier, highly educated individuals into a neighborhood. As gentrification accelerates in cities around the U.S, we are interested in the effects of this neighborhood upheaval on belonging and how geographical context may moderate this relationship. Specifically, how does urbanity affect a person’s perceptions of the visual changes associated with gentrification and how they feel they belong? As gentrification often facilitates increased development and construction, urban residents may be more familiar with these visual changes and feel more belonging. In contrast, suburban and rural residents may feel the opposite. We collected data from 885 U.S. adults using a within-subjects online survey experiment where participants saw Google Street View photos of gentrifying and stable (i.e., not-gentrifying low-income) neighborhoods. We found that rural and suburban participants felt significantly less overall belonging than urban residents. Moreover, there was an interaction effect such that rural and suburban participants felt even less belonging to the gentrifying neighborhood than the stable neighborhood. These findings suggest that rural and suburban residents may be especially psychologically vulnerable to the visual changes associated with gentrification. As gentrification proliferates beyond major metropolitan areas, suburban and rural residents may be at increased risk of social displacement.