Home Care In Brandeis, CA

Sally Warner and Noel Gutiérrez Brizuela

Sally Warner is an associate professor of Climate Science at Brandeis. Noel Gutiérrez Brizuela is a Ph.D. Candidate in Physical Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego. This article is republished from The Conversation.

When a hurricane hits land, the destruction can be visible for years or even decades. Less obvious, but also powerful, is the effect hurricanes have on the oceans.

In a new study, we show through real-time measurements that hurricanes don’t just churn water at the surface. They can also push heat deep into the ocean in ways that can lock it up for years and ultimately affect regions far from the storm.

Heat is the key component of this story. It has long been known that hurricanes gain their energy from warm sea surface temperatures. This heat helps moist air near the ocean surface rise like a hot air balloon and form clouds taller than Mount Everest. This is why hurricanes generally form in tropical regions.

What we discovered is that hurricanes ultimately help warm the ocean, too, by enhancing its ability to absorb and store heat. And that can have far-reaching consequences.

How hurricanes draw energy from the ocean’s heat. Kelvin Ma via Wikimedia

When hurricanes mix heat into the ocean, that heat doesn’t just resurface in the same place. We showed how underwater waves produced by the storm can push the heat roughly four times deeper than mixing alone, sending it to a depth where the heat is trapped far from the surface. From there, deep sea currents can transport it thousands of miles. A hurricane that travels across the western Pacific Ocean and hits the Philippines could end up supplying warm water that heats up the coast of Ecuador years later.

For two months in the fall of 2018, we lived aboard the research vessel Thomas G. Thompson to record how the Philippine Sea responded to changing weather patterns. As ocean scientists, we study turbulent mixing in the ocean and hurricanes and other tropical storms that generate this turbulence.

Skies were clear and winds were calm during the first half of our experiment. But in the second half, three major typhoons – as hurricanes are known in this part of the world – stirred up the ocean.

Microstructure profilers are used to measure ocean turbulence. This one is designed and built by the Ocean Mixing Group at Oregon State University. Sally Warner

We measure ocean turbulence with an instrument called a microstructure profiler, which free-falls nearly 1,000 feet (300 meters) and uses a probe similar to a phonograph needle to measure turbulent motions of the water.

Imagine the tropical ocean before a hurricane passes over it. At the surface is a layer of warm water, warmer than 80 degrees Fahrenheit (27 degrees Celsius), that is heated by the sun and extends roughly 160 feet (50 meters) below the surface. Below it are layers of colder water.

The temperature difference between the layers keeps the waters separated and virtually unable to affect each other. You can think of it like the division between the oil and vinegar in an unshaken bottle of salad dressing.

As a hurricane passes over the tropical ocean, its strong winds help stir the boundaries between the water layers, much like someone shaking the bottle of salad dressing. In the process, cold deep water is mixed up from below and warm surface water is mixed downward. This causes surface temperatures to cool, allowing the ocean to absorb heat more efficiently than usual in the days after a hurricane.

For over two decades, scientists have debated whether the warm waters that are mixed downward by hurricanes could heat ocean currents and thereby shape global climate patterns. At the heart of this question was whether hurricanes could pump heat deep enough so that it stays in the ocean for years.

These illustrations show what happens to ocean heat before, during, after and many months after a hurricane passes over the ocean. Sally Warner

By analyzing subsurface ocean measurements taken before and after three hurricanes, we found that underwater waves transport heat roughly four times deeper into the ocean than direct mixing during the hurricane. These waves, which are generated by the hurricane itself, transport the heat deep enough that it cannot be easily released back into the atmosphere.

Once this heat is picked up by large-scale ocean currents, it can be transported to distant parts of the ocean.

The heat injected by the typhoons we studied in the Philippine Sea may have flowed to the coasts of Ecuador or California, following current patterns that carry water from west to east across the equatorial Pacific.

At this point, the heat may be mixed back up to the surface by a combination of shoaling currents, upwelling and turbulent mixing. Once the heat is close to the surface again, it can warm the local climate and affect ecosystems.

For instance, coral reefs are particularly sensitive to extended periods of heat stress. El Niño events are the typical culprit behind coral bleaching in Ecuador, but the excess heat from the hurricanes that we observed may contribute to stressed reefs and bleached coral far from where the storms appeared.

Coral reefs are essential habitat for fish and other sea life, but they are threatened by rising ocean temperatures. James Watt via NOAA

It is also possible that the excess heat from hurricanes stays within the ocean for decades or more without returning to the surface. This would actually have a mitigating impact on climate change.

As hurricanes redistribute heat from the ocean surface to greater depths, they can help to slow down warming of the Earth’s atmosphere by keeping the heat sequestered in the ocean.

Scientists have long thought of hurricanes as extreme events fueled by ocean heat and shaped by the Earth’s climate. Our findings, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, add a new dimension to this problem by showing that the interactions go both ways — hurricanes themselves have the ability to heat up the ocean and shape the Earth’s climate.

Two Jewish groups have filed a 36-page lawsuit against the University of California system, UC Berkeley, and their leaders, alleging a “longstanding, unchecked spread of antisemitism.”

The groups suing the university are Louis D. Brandeis Center (LDB), an independent, non-profit institution for public interest advocacy, research, and education, and Jewish Americans for Fairness in Education (JAFE), an organization part of the Brandeis Center, Erudera.com reports.

The lawsuit claims that UC Berkeley has failed to address discrimination against Jewish students, and that has resulted in the spread of antisemitism, violence, and harassment targeting students.

According to it, incidents and protests that have been organized on campus since Israeli bombardment of the Gaza Strip that began after Hamas’ attack on October 7, are evidence of the discrimination faced by Jewish students.

The plaintiffs are challenging policies implemented by at least 23 Berkeley Law student groups, arguing that such policies exclude students or prevent Zionist guest speakers from participating in events if they disagree to deny Israel.

“Under these policies, Jewish students, faculty and guest speakers must deny a central part of their cultural, ancestral heritage and a fundamental tenant of their faith in order to be eligible for the same opportunities Berkeley accords to others,” the lawsuit stated.

They say anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism, mentioning violations of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, the First Amendment right to freedom of religion, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and more.

Berkeley’s leaders said the lawsuit contradicts students’ First Amendment rights to free speech. According to them, the university cannot prevent students’ protests but acknowledges the potential distress for Jewish students and has offered counseling support and arrangement in school.

“While we appreciate the concerns expressed by the Brandeis Center, UC Berkeley believes the claims made in the lawsuit are not consistent with the First Amendment of the Constitution, or the facts of what is actually happening on our campus,” Dan Mogulof, assistant vice chancellor for UC Berkeley told The Hill, recalling Berkeley’s long commitment to fighting antisemitism and its 2019 “Antisemitism Education Initiative.”

The war between Israel and Palestine has increased tension in several other colleges and universities in the US, leaving students and staff fearful and in distress. Students at many universities in the country have complained about their universities’ slow responses to the Israel-Hamas war.

Amid the situation, over 30 Harvard University student groups signed a letter, blaming only Israel for the violence in the region after the October 7 attacks.

>> Columbia University Suspends Two Pro-Palestinian Student Groups Amid Policy Violations

© Janet Ganbold | Unsplash

NR Daily is delivered right to you every afternoon. No charge.

Brandeis University banned Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) from campus, citing the group’s support for the terrorist group Hamas, making it the first private institution of higher education in the country to ban the organization.

“This decision was not made lightly, as Brandeis is dedicated to upholding free speech principles, which have been codified in Brandeis’ Principles of Free Speech and Free Expression,” a letter sent to the college’s resident SJP chapter, first obtained by Jewish Insider, explained. “However, those Principles note that ‘The freedom to debate and discuss ideas does not mean that individuals may say whatever they wish, wherever they wish, or however they wish.'”

“The National SJP has called on its chapters to engage in conduct that supports Hamas in its call for the violent elimination of Israel and the Jewish people. These tactics are not protected by the University’s Principles. As a result, the University made the decision that the Brandeis chapter of the National SJP must be unrecognized and will no longer be eligible to receive funding, be permitted to conduct activities on campus, or use the Brandeis name and logo in promoting itself or its activities, including through social media channels.”

The directive coincided with an op-ed written by Brandeis president Ronald Liebowitz explaining the decision against the backdrop of skyrocketing incidents of antisemitism across American campuses. “Brandeis University is a secular institution founded by the American Jewish community in 1948 to counter antisemitism and bigotry in higher education. So where do Brandeis and higher education find themselves today?” Liebowitz wrote in the Boston Globe on Monday.

“Specifically, chants and social media posts calling for violence against Jews or the annihilation of the state of Israel must not be tolerated. This includes phrases such as ‘from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ — which calls for the erasure of the Jewish state; ‘there is only one solution’ — which echoes the Nazi strategy of killing all Jews; and ‘intifada, intifada’ — an incitement to violence against Israeli civilians,” the school’s president elaborated.

“Student organizations that do engage in such practices should lose all privileges associated with affiliation at their schools. In no way does this violate higher education’s deep and enduring commitment to free speech,” Liebowitz concluded without explicitly naming the student group.

In late October, Florida governor Ron DeSantis directed schools across the state to deactivate local SJP chapters, arguing that the group “knowingly provide[d] material support…to a designated foreign terrorist organization.”

“These chapters exist under the headship of the National Students for Justice in Palestine, who distributed a toolkit identifying themselves as part of the Operation AlAqsa Flood,” Ray Rodrigues, chancellor of the State University System of Florida, wrote in a letter at the time. “Based on the National SJP’s support of terrorism, in consultation with Governor DeSantis, the student chapters must be deactivated.”

Rodrigues pointed to a “toolkit” released by the national SJP body praising the Hamas atrocities, known by the codename Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, and demanding student members play a part in the global “resistance” movement. The document contained cartoon graphics showing Hamas paragliders for American chapters to use and applauded Hamas’ invasion of Israel.

“Today, we witness a historic win for the Palestinian resistance: Across land, air, and sea, our people have broken down the artificial barriers of the Zionist entity, taking with it the facade of an impenetrable settler colony and reminding each of us that total return and liberation to Palestine is near,” the introduction of the document reads. “As the Palestinian student movement, we have an unshakable responsibility to join the call for mass mobilization.”

“Palestinian students in exile are PART of this movement, not in solidarity with this movement,’” Rodrigues wrote in the Florida memorandum. “Here, National SJP has affirmatively identified it is part of the Operation Al-Aqsa Flood — a terrorist led attack.”

The leadership of the student group, in cooperation with Palestine Legal, released a statement following the governor’s decision asserting that SJP would challenge it in court. “The claim relies on the broad and vague ‘material support for terrorism’ regime, which criminalizes even nonviolent coordination with designated terrorist organizations,” the legal group specializing in bolstering “the Palestine solidarity movement,” writes.

“This is a blatant attack on students’ First Amendment rights, and it will be challenged in court,” the statement added. “Florida, particularly under the leadership of Governor Ron DeSantis, has been actively undermining education, freedom of speech, and social justice movements, including by banning anti-racist courses and trying to criminalize protests. It is not surprising that this egregious move to silence the student movement for Palestinian rights is being pursued under DeSantis.”

A similar sentiment was echoed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a free speech advocacy group. “None of the chants or slogans cited by President Liebowitz come close to meeting the legal criteria for incitement or harassment. Make no mistake, Brandeis is punishing its students for nothing more than protected political advocacy,” the organization told National Review in a statement.

“In this difficult moment, Brandeis could have demonstrated how students can engage with opposing viewpoints. Instead, President Liebowitz is teaching them to simply silence those they hate. This betrayal of Brandeis’s free speech promises is a stain on the school’s 75-year reputation as a bastion for free inquiry.”

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) argued in a letter to almost 200 university administrators that SJP chapters across the country have endorsed the Palestinian terrorist group’s attack and warned that their conduct could violate state and federal laws related to supporting a foreign terrorist organization. One example from the ADL highlighted revealed an SJP chapter at the University of Virginia released an official statement proclaiming, “We stand in solidarity with Palestinian resistance fighters,” one day after the massacre on October 7.

A “Vigil for Palestine” hosted by the SJP on Brandeis was canceled following the announcement. “With heavy hearts, we would like to announce that our chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine has been unjustly de-chartered,” the group wrote in a statement on Instagram. “This comes as a part of Brandeis University, an institution that values social justice, trying to silence us from speaking our truth,” the group added, “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”

In a brazen act of viewpoint discrimination, Brandeis becomes the first private university in the nation to ban an SJP campus chapter since October 7.

The Brandeis University chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine is no more. The chapter was notified yesterday that, due to comments made by the national organization in support of Hamas, “which the United States has designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization,” the campus chapter “must be unrecognized,” according to a copy of the notification letter provided to FIRE.

This troubling decision came on the same day Brandeis President Ronald Liebowitz published an op-ed in the Boston Globe calling on university leaders to “find their moral compass and no longer allow speech that constitutes harassment or threat of violence to flourish on our campuses.”

Specifically, he added, “Chants and social media posts calling for violence against Jews or the annihilation of the state of Israel must not be tolerated.” The list of phrases Liebowitz wants banned include “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” which, he said, “calls for the erasure of the Jewish state,” as well as support for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement, which he described as “blatant demonstration of antisemitism.”

In its letter to the Brandeis chapter of SJP, the university justified the derecognition, saying “a genuine threat or harassment” is not protected by the university’s Principles of Free Speech and Free Expression, which were adopted in 2018.

Yet, as evidence of this supposed misconduct, Liebowitz provides only speech protected by those very principles. Brandeis is a private university and therefore is not bound by the First Amendment, but its current free speech policies claim the school has “a responsibility to encourage the airing of the widest range of political and scholarly opinions and to prevent attempts to shut down conversations, no matter what their topic.”

And as FIRE reminds Brandeis in a letter today, “It is settled law that denying student group recognition based on viewpoint, speech, or fear of disruption violates free speech principles, particularly with regard to campus chapter groups’ ties to a national organization.”

Now is the time for the school’s leadership to stand on principle. If you only support the free speech that you approve of, then you don’t support free speech at all.

Criminal conduct such as making true threats, inciting unlawful conduct, and providing material support to terrorist groups, is not protected by the First Amendment or analogous free expression promises, like the one at Brandeis. In fact, according to Brandeis’ own free speech policies in the student handbook — which are legally binding under Massachusetts law — the chants Liebowitz cites as offensive are nonetheless protected political speech.

Nor is there any indication that actions by members of Brandeis SJP rose to the level of peer harassment, which the Supreme Court defined in Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education as words or actions that are “so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it can be said to deprive the victims of access to the educational opportunities or benefits provided by the school.”

SJP’s alleged comments do not approach this high bar and are fully protected by the university’s free speech promises. As the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights further clarified, discriminatory harassment “must include something beyond the mere expression of views, words, symbols, or thoughts that some person finds offensive.” Even more problematic, Brandeis appeared to have based its decision on the advocacy of the national SJP organization, punishing students for words they didn’t even say.

Brandeis University

School Ranking

138 of 248

Due Process

Sexual misconduct: D

Non-sexual misconduct: C

Title IX: B

Speech Code

Yellow

Free Speech Climate

Overall score: 45

More Info

The decision to ban SJP not only contravenes the university’s free speech promises, but also the free speech philosophy espoused by the university’s namesake, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, who said in his concurring opinion in Whitney v. California that the “freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile.”

In comments to FIRE, Brandeis SJP members expressed shock and disbelief at the decision, emphasizing they are not affiliated with the national SJP group.

“We want to affirm that we are our own independent organization and we have not participated in any of the National SJP events since Oct. 7 and have not released anything that could be harmful towards any member of the community,” the chapter said in an email to FIRE.

Now is the time for the school’s leadership to stand on principle. If you only support the free speech that you approve of, then you don’t support free speech at all.

FIRE urges Brandeis to reverse this illegal derecognition and publicly recommit to the institution’s laudable free expression policies.

Brandeis University president Ronald D. Liebowitz turned to censorship to combat campus antisemitism. He’s wrong.

On the same day the Globe published Liebowitz’s op-ed, “How universities should confront antisemitism on campus” (Nov. 6), Brandeis became the first private university to ban its campus chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine following the national SJP’s call for its chapters to support Palestinian resistance. Liebowitz claimed this ban does not “violate higher education’s deep and enduring commitment to free speech.”

If Brandeis, a private institution, is genuinely committed to free speech (“Brandeis ban raises free speech issues,” Page A1, Nov. 8), it must uphold, not censor, student advocacy. “Core political speech,” according to the Supreme Court, is where free speech protections should be at their “zenith.” Without evidence that Brandeis’s SJP chapter crossed the line into true threats, incitement, harassment, or material support for terrorism, all Brandeis has done is censor a pro-Palestinian student group, setting a precedent for more censorship.

Get The Primary Source

Globe Opinion's weekly take on politics, delivered every Wednesday.

Enter Email

Barring groups that “spew hate” from campus may seem laudable, but it allows administrators to censor ideas they subjectively find offensive. Censorship is not how you combat antisemitism. The university’s own principles on maximizing free speech cite Justice Louis Brandeis’s remedy of “more speech, not enforced silence,” for the process of education.

Graham Piro

Program officer, campus rights advocacy

Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE)

Washington, D.C.

In his Nov. 6 op-ed, Ronald D. Liebowitz, president of Brandeis, writes that the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement “aims to dismantle the Jewish state and end the right to Jewish national self-determination” and cites, for this statement, a report from the Anti-Defamation League. If Globe readers want to learn more about the BDS movement, they should look at its own documents.

There are three demands (simplified here):

1. Ending the occupation of Arab lands.

2. Recognizing the right of Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality.

3. The right of return under international law for displaced Palestinians from 1948.

It is this last demand that some have erroneously interpreted as a call to dismantle the Jewish state. It is true that the right of return might lead to demographic changes in Israel, such that Jews are no longer a majority, but this is no different than the demographic changes occurring in various parts of the United States where white people may no longer be a majority. As long as all are guaranteed full and equal human rights, every person has a right to vote, and various cultures, religions, and ethnicities are free to practice their own customs, one does not need to be the majority.

My mother lost her Austrian citizenship in 1938 when she fled Hitler at 13, but due to a recent change in Austrian law, I have regained Austrian citizenship this year. Now I have dual citizenship and the right to vote in Austrian elections and travel on an EU passport. After 85 years, my right of return has been recognized. I fervently wish this for all Palestinians.

True safety for Israelis can only be achieved when the human rights of Palestinians are fully recognized.

Helen Raizen

Jamaica Plain

I do not consider hate speech to be free speech or even dissent. Students for Justice in Palestine has been a source of objectionable speech on college campuses in our country for decades.

Hate speech has led to the recent uptick in violence against our Jewish citizens. Consider, for example, the recent death (still under investigation) of a 69-year-old Jewish man in Los Angeles, whose only apparent “crime” was holding up an Israeli flag in one of two protests — one pro-Israel, the other pro-Palestinian — over the Israel-Hamas war.

I fully support president Ronald D. Leibowitz in defunding the Brandeis chapter of SJP and rescinding its status as an official campus group, and I suggest all college campuses in our country and around the world do the same.

Deborah Gordon

Wellesley Hills