What we Learn from Trump’s Indictment about the Mathematical Community
By Della Dumbaugh
Della Dumbaugh
The process that led to the recent indictment of former president Donald Trump unwittingly offers some insights on strengthening our mathematical community. In particular, the recent New York Times article, “How the D.A. Restructured the Case Against Trump: A Revamped Team and a Victory in Court Gave New Life to an Old Thread” highlights how the new District Attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, went back to basics when he assumed his position a little over a year ago, built a team that included talented women, and intentionally formed teams of colleagues with different strengths.
Back to Basics. On January 1, 2022, Bragg was sworn in as the District Attorney of New York County (Manhattan). As with all District Attorneys, Bragg inherited a number of ongoing cases. In particular, he inherited an investigation of one Donald J. Trump. In the spring of 2022, however, Bragg decided not to bring charges against the former president. Despite Bragg’s insistence that the inquiry into Trump was not over, many questioned the veracity of his claim and the two lead investigators resigned. Bragg, however, had a plan. He went back to basics: that is, he and his team returned to documents and other evidence that his predecessors had reviewed, this time looking for new insights. This strategy aligns with one time-honored approach to solving challenging problems in mathematics: when it seems difficult to find your way forward, then it can be helpful to look backward, to review what you have already considered and reflect on those ideas with a fresh perspective. For students, this approach provides a critical next step in what can seem like an otherwise daunting process and builds confidence in the practice of learning mathematics. This combination lays a foundation for success in the next generation of mathematicians.
Build a diverse team. Bragg doubled-down on his efforts when he put together a strong team to investigate Trump, including several prominent women. He added Catherine McCaw, an attorney who played a prominent role in the prosecution of Anna Sorokin, aka Anna Delvey, and Rebecca Mangold and Katherine Ellis, prosecutors from the Major Economics Crimes Bureau, to the Trump team. Since “[d]iversity enhances creativity…[and] encourages the search for novel information and perspectives [Phillips],” this tactic complemented Bragg’s initial effort to reconsider evidence. Bragg’s appointments call attention to the critical importance of utilizing the strengths of all members of a community. As the mathematical community has expanded to include increasingly diverse groups of people, colleagues have worked together to create initiatives that echo Bragg’s perspective. In terms of women, the Women and Mathematics Program at the Institute for Advanced Study, the Nebraska Conference for Undergraduate Women in Mathematics, and the Carleton Summer Mathematics Program are all designed to welcome women into the discipline, strengthen their knowledge in the field, and expand their network of colleagues with similar interests. The Infinite Possibilities Conference and the Math Alliance initiative specifically aim to advance mathematicians from underrepresented groups. Closer to home, colleagues have begun to address strategies for reducing bias in faculty searches in order to foster diversity at our institutions where we invest and focus our energies every day.
Leverage Strengths on the Team. When Bragg assumed his position, he inherited a tax fraud case against the Trump Organization. The trial for the Trump Organization began in very late October, 2022. For the trial, Bragg intentionally formed a prosecution team of attorneys with different strengths. Specifically, he paired Susan Hoffinger, the head of investigations in his office with Joshua Steinglass, a trial lawyer with experience in homicide cases. The jury cast a vote in favor of Bragg’s team when they found the Trump Organization guilty. Katherine Phillips offers some insights into the behind-the-scenes success of this approach when she outlines how collaborators with different perspectives anticipate “disagreement and potential difficulty,” they “work harder on explaining [their] rationale and anticipating alternatives than [they] would have otherwise. This is how diversity works: by promoting hard work and creativity; by encouraging the consideration of alternatives even before any interpersonal interaction takes place. The pain associated with diversity can be thought of as the pain of exercise. You have to push yourself to grow your muscles. The pain, as the old saw goes, produces the gain. In just the same way, we need diversity—in teams, organizations and society as a whole—if we are to change, grow and innovate.” As we welcome different voices into the mathematics community, Bragg’s strategy and Phillips’s encouragement serve as timely reminders that our classrooms, departments, institutions, and broader mathematical organizations will actually lead to better outcomes with this wider array of contributors. The Mathematical Sciences Research Institute provides an excellent case study of how Bragg’s strategy to leverage various strengths of every member of their community united an entire organization around a single focus. Erica Winterer documents the benefits of leveraging the strengths of students with a wide range of backgrounds and abilities in a mathematics classroom.
Although it may seem unsettling to bring charges against a former president, the process that led to this historic event provides valuable insights for the future of the mathematics community. It inspires us to take a moment to move forward by looking backward, to give people a chance, and to be unafraid to welcome new faces and voices to the mathematical community.
References
Bromwich, J., Protess, B. and Rashbaum, W. “How the D.A. Restructured the Case Against Trump: A Revamped Team and a Victory in Court Gave New Life to an Old Thread.” The New York Times, April 2, 2023, p. A1.
Katherine W. Phillips, “How Diversity Works,” Scientific American, 311 (4) (October 2014): 42-47. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1014-42.
Also available at: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-diversity-makes-us-smarter/
Della Dumbaugh is a Professor of Mathematics at the University of Richmond. She is Editor of the American Mathematical Monthly and co-editor, with Deanna Haunsperger, of Count Me In: Community and Belonging in Mathematics.