Two months in, Penn first years express mixed reactions to new pilot College curriculum
The new program, titled College Foundations, consists of
SEHGAL, ARTI JAIN, AND ANANYA KARTHIK Senior Reporter and
Contributing Reporters
Penn’s College of Arts and Sciences introduced a new pilot curriculum for first-year students this fall, aiming to provide a broad liberal arts education through an integrated set of courses.
The new program, titled College Foundations, consists of four classes that fulfill up to six general education requirements — a writing seminar, a first-year seminar, and two courses known as “Kite” and “Key” that focus on the humanities and
sciences, respectively. The Daily Pennsylvanian spoke to College first years enrolled in the program about their experiences with its organization and content.
In an interview with the DP when the program was announced, College Dean Peter Struck said that the program is meant to provide a “broad introduction to what the arts and sciences curriculum is all about.”
According to Struck, the pilot program marks the beginning of a three-year process, with this year serving as “a year of vetting.” In the spring of 2026, SAS faculty will vote before a period of “implementation to roll out a broader curriculum” next fall.
Multiple students said that the pilot has encouraged them to explore new disciplines, even if the
See COURSES, page 3
On Friday, Penn President Larry Jameson publicly released the full text of the University’s letter to the Department of Education declining to sign the preferential funding compact.
In an Oct. 24 email to the Penn community, Jameson said he was releasing the letter “in the spirit of transparency” following requests from the Penn community after his Oct. 16 announcement that Penn had submitted feedback about the compact to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. Of the seven schools that declined the White House’s offer, Penn was the only one that did not immediately disclose the contents of its written response.
The letter emphasized that Penn’s “policies and practices are already aligned with many of the core principles” outlined in the proposed compact.
“Our support of the nation is enduring,” the letter read. “We agree that universities must uphold the highest standards of excellence grounded in merit, integrity, and accountability.”
However, Jameson wrote to McMahon that “significant portions of the Compact and its overarching framing would undermine Penn’s ability to advance our mission and the nation’s interests.”
He raised five major concerns, including regarding provisions that established funding preferences based on “subjective standards and undefined processes.”
Jameson expressed an additional concern that the compact harms academic freedom and promotes protections for “conservative thought alone.” The letter also criticized the compact’s focus on tuition-free
See LETTER , page 2
The union representing Penn’s security officers held numerous rallies throughout Philadelphia on Monday, calling on Allied Universal Security Services — the University’s security contractor — to raise wages in their new contract proposal.
The demonstrations — which were organized by Service Employees International Union 32BJ across several locations in the city — come as workers prepare to strike against Allied Universal. According to a union spokesperson, around 200 individuals participated in the rallies across several Philadelphia locations.
Attendees were handed informational flyers with the union’s grievances and instructions for petitioning Allied Universal leadership to pay “essential workers what they deserve.”
“With wages as low as $16.25/hour, most of us struggle to afford even groceries and rent,” the flyer read. “The company we work for, Allied Universal, is refusing to pay us a livable wage.”
In a statement to The Daily Pennsylvanian, a spokesperson for Allied Universal said the company has “good working relationships with unions around the country, including the SEIU.”
“We are engaged in good faith negotiations with the SEIU to renew the existing collective bargaining agreement in Philadelphia,” the Allied Universal spokesperson wrote.
In an interview with the DP, a Penn security guard — who requested anonymity due to fear of professional retaliation — said that many of the
guards believe they should have increased compensation because of their consistent dedication to their jobs.
“We show up every day,” the Penn security guard said. “We show up tired, we show up sick, we show up confused, we show up belittled, we show up afraid, we show up every single day. So, I’m just asking that they would look at that and try to assist us the best way that they can, through our union.”
32BJ SEIU recently conducted a survey of over 500 Philadelphia security officers to determine their quality of life based on their wages, according to a union press release.
According to the published findings of the union’s survey, more than half of the security officers reported having skipped meals or cut back on groceries. Two in five reported paying their rent or mortgage late or not able to pay at all, and over a quarter reported going without necessary medical care in order to save on expenses.
“Every guard deserves to be paid good benefits, good wages so they can live,” Allied Universal security guard Beverly Thorpe told the DP. “Guards have children to take care of, mouths to feed on that little wage. How [are] you gonna feed your kids with that little bit of wage?”
Allied Universal security guard Andre Dozier, who has been at the bargaining table with Allied Universal to discuss their proposal, expressed frustration at the company’s lack of transparency and See ALLIED, page 3
PHOTO COURTESY OF “JEOPARDY!” Mishra (right) won “Jeopardy!” on Oct.
MAX MESTER | DP FILE PHOTO
federal court to reverse the dismissal of a lawsuit which accused Penn of insufficiently responding to antisemitism on campus.
The Oct. 22 brief — submitted by a Jewish legal rights advocacy group in the 3rd United States Circuit Court of Appeals — responded to a December 2023 lawsuit originally brought by 2024 College graduate Eyal Yakoby and College junior Jordan Davis. The filing accused Penn and the district court that dismissed the lawsuit of ignoring a “hostile educational environment” for Jewish students.
“In evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of Penn’s responses to harassment reported by Plaintiffs to the school’s administration, the court completely failed to consider the broader hostile environment for Jews on
campus, as exacerbated by the intense and growing antisemitic climate in educational settings and across the U.S.,” the brief read.
It asserted that the district court failed to acknowledge antisemitic events experienced by the plaintiffs that have made them feel “threatened and or unsafe.”
In March 2024, two new plaintiffs — 2025 Penn graduate Noah Rubin and Students Against Antisemitism — joined the suit. An amended complaint at the time asserted that Penn had become an “incubation lab” for antisemitism and that the University placed Jewish and Israeli students at “severe emotional and physical risk.”
“Without considering these factors—or engaging much at all with Plaintiffs’ detailed allegations of anti-Jewish harassment and hate—the district court cannot have properly assessed the adequacy of Penn’s
The Brandeis Center filed a brief to reverse the dismissal of a lawsuit against Penn.
responses,” the brief read.
The brief also cited high rates of anti-Jewish sentiment across the United States in support of the plaintiffs, including a rise in antisemitic incidents on college campuses and Jewish Americans feeling “compelled to hide their Jewish identity.”
The Brandeis Center, which has previously sought federal action against Penn through the Department of Education, detailed the reasoning behind the filing in an Oct. 23 statement.
“Inaction from universities and other entities in addressing anti-semitism is normalized when courts overlook the broader context of surging anti-semitism nationwide,” the center’s chairman, Kenneth Marcus, wrote. “This undoubtedly leads to the proliferation of similar incidents in the future.”
LETTER , from front page
education for students in the “hard sciences,” warning of “unintended consequences.”
In the letter’s conclusion, Jameson wrote that universities “already have a compact with the American people … built on the open exchange of ideas, meritbased selection and achievement, and freedom of inquiry to yield knowledge.”
The initial lawsuit was brought under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in programs receiving federal financial assistance. The plaintiffs accused Penn of failing to enforce its own policies to protect Jewish students from discrimination, harassment, and intimidation on campus.
This June, federal judge Mitchell Goldberg granted Penn’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, finding “no allegations” that Penn took any actions which could “be interpreted as antisemitic with the intention of causing harm to the Plaintiffs.”
In his memorandum opinion, Goldberg wrote that the plaintiffs would have another opportunity to file an amended complaint for two of the alleged violations, leaving the lawsuit open to future action.
In his email, Jameson confirmed that Penn has “not had any further discussions with the government regarding the Compact” since submitting the letter.
“Penn respectfully declines to sign the proposed Compact. We hope this feedback is useful and we remain open and committed to partnering with the federal government to advance discoveries, educate future leaders, and serve our community, nation, and world,” Jameson wrote in the letter.
Following Jameson’s Oct. 16 decision, Penn became the third university to decline the offer.
In an Oct. 5 message, Jameson announced that the University was “reviewing” the document and would seek input from deans, the Faculty Senate, and the University Board of Trustees to make a final decision.
An analysis by The Daily Pennsylvanian found that Penn’s initial response to the compact marked an increase in its transparency with the University community. The recent email disclosing Jameson’s letter to
The University shared its written response to the Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education.
Welcome To Destination Living
In the Heart of Northern Liberties, Philadelphia
Piazza Alta is a collection of thoughtfully curated residences nestled in the heart of Northern Liberties. Offering a wide array of layouts and finishes from studios to penthouses each apartment offers spectacular light and air, spa-like bathrooms, and chef-quality kitchens with distinctively modern features.
Exceptional, all-inclusive amenities such as a 25,000 sq ft state-of-the-art fitness and recovery center, coworking lounge, private spa, and access to the Aqua Foro Rooftop Pool Club, not to mention onsite parking, bike storage, and 24/7 concierge services, make the Piazza Alta the premiere choice for your new home.
RIYA MITRA | STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER
ELLIE PIRTLE | STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER
McMahon represented the third official communication from Penn’s administration regarding the compact with campus stakeholders.
Amy Gutmann, former German vice chancellor discuss U.S.-German relations at Perry World House event
The speakers emphasized the impacts of the strong relations between the United States and Germany during Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and how these relations have since changed
ERHAG
RACHEL
Contributing Reporter
Former Penn President and United States Ambassador to Germany Amy Gutmann and former German Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck discussed the shifting transatlantic partnership between Western Europe and the U.S. at an event hosted by Perry World House on Tuesday.
At the Oct. 28 event, the speakers emphasized the impacts of the strong U.S.-German relations during Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — occurring at the very beginning of Gutmann’s tenure as ambassador — and how these relations have since changed.
The event was introduced by Provost John Jackson Jr., who categorized diplomacy as “building a bridge when everyone wants to burn it down.”
Gutmann worked closely with Habeck during her time as ambassador, and the two discussed the nature of their personal relationship leading up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. They stressed the significance of their mutual trust in shaping the cooperation between Germany and the United States.
During the event, Gutmann said that the United States had “the highest degree of confidence” that the Russian invasion of Ukraine “was going to happen.” She explained that her close relationship with Habeck allowed her to share this information with him — and by extension, with Germany.
“The fact that we could trust people like Robert strengthened the United States-Germany relationship, because Robert was just so clearly an ally,” she added. “It brought the personal into the political.”
Gutmann explained that, when the conflict erupted, there had been a “bipartisan view” that both the U.S. and Germany should support Ukraine against Putin.
COURSES, from front page
coursework is demanding.
College first year Shannon Katzenberger described the program as a “cool way to get [her] gen-ed requirements done,” adding that her “Key” course has felt widely applicable.
“I think we’re learning stuff that’s actually applicable in everyday life,” Katzenberger said in an interview with the DP. “We’ve been learning basic Python, which is never something that I thought I would learn.”
College first year Mark Doraszelski — who is also taking the “Key” class this semester — said that his choice to enroll in the program “came down to the number of foundations and sectors completed from the get-go.”
“I’d rather finish the general education requirements and be able to afford to take whatever classes I want without having to worry about them fulfilling a specific foundation or sector,” he told the DP.
However, College first year Gabri Kurtzer-Ellenbogen said that the program’s restrictions initially deterred her from the program.
“I spoke to my advisor and to a professor about potentially dropping the Foundations program next semester — not even because of ‘Kite,’ but more because of the restrictions it places on writing seminars,” Kurtzer-Ellenbogen said.
Students in the program taking a writing seminar during the spring semester can choose from four options — two of which are sections of Craft of Prose, offering “significant amount of individualized attention and guidance” and smaller class sizes.
Doraszelski added that the program may not be beneficial to students who already know what they
ALLIED, from front page
unwillingness to negotiate a “livable wage” for security guards.
“When we ran the numbers, we found that Allied has way more than enough money to provide what the people want,” Dozier told the DP. “And that’s the part they don’t want us to do — showing the evidence of the truth and saying that this is a fair wage for us to receive.”
Earlier this month, Dozier helped to advocate and pass a bill in City Hall that would require employers to fund training for security guards. He said that security guards often encounter dangerous situations that require specialized training but are frequently forced to pay for it themselves.
“I have to pay out of pocket for additional training just so I can have the safety and the comfort of
“The disagreements were on how to do it, how much we could afford to do, how much we wanted Germany to do today,” Gutmann added.
While there was some question regarding how much support should be offered — both in terms of fiscal and military resources — the understanding of which country should be supported was clear.
Habeck explained that Germany’s support for Ukraine came from its priority to protect European democracies and liberty. He referenced the 2014 “Revolution of Dignity” in Kyiv, which led to the death of 108 Ukrainian civilians who were protesting against the rejection of the European Union-Ukraine Association Agreement.
Habeck said that young people in Ukraine “were protesting for their future and their freedom.”
“The young people of Ukraine were willing to die for a free and liberal society,” he said. “They were arguing for belonging to Europe and that Ukraine should be part of the European Union — in the end, they were shot.”
“So then, suddenly all this talk about ‘we should not provoke Russia’ — it was just talk. The question became: How can we help them?”
However, the transatlantic agreement on how to address the conflict has not remained the same. In particular, Habeck referenced the potential decrease in U.S. military support for Ukraine, noting that it reflects a growing divide between German and U.S. perspectives on how NATO should respond to such conflicts.
“You can see … how important it is that the United States and Europe work closely together,” Habeck
want to study.
“Some people are choosing not to take the ‘Key’ seminar if they already know they’re going to be a STEM-based major, because they think those classes are going to get fulfilled with their major requirements,” he said.
Other students said that the curriculum has pushed them to explore unfamiliar subjects.
“I’ve never heard of coding before,” College first year Max Torres told the DP. “It’s difficult, but really fun because [our professor] makes a problem fun. I definitely see the usefulness of coding now.”
Khalifa Alkhoori, who is also a first year in the College, said that “Kite” courses “broadened [his] knowledge base.”
“I actually wanted to learn different things,” Alkhoori said. “I didn’t want to just learn about a war that happened, or just about psychology, or just about philosophy, or just about ideology.”
Some students said that College Foundations has helped them connect with their classmates outside of their usual academic circles.
“It definitely helped me socially,” Torres said. “I’ve made many friends that I probably wouldn’t have made outside of it.”
College first year Candie Dong also characterized the community as “amazing.”
“In my ‘Kite’ class, even just saying something simple about my culture and how it relates to me really broadens other people’s perspectives,” Dong said. “When it comes to discussions, everyone will try to build upon each other’s ideas.”
Alkhoori said that while she does not yet know what she will study, she feels confident that “what [she’s] learning today is helping [her] understand different perspectives and different people and sort of different ideologies that go on around [her].”
“It’s making me into a more complete person,” he added.
applying emergency care when it’s needed,” Dozier said. “I had to revive a 9-year-old boy that was blue.
If I didn’t have the training and I wasn’t there at that moment, that little boy wouldn’t have made it.”
A spokesperson for City Council member Jamie Gauthier — who represents the district that houses Penn’s campus — wrote in a statement to the DP that she “stands with the unionized security guards who keep Philly safe.” Gauthier’s spokesperson further stated that she “urges employers to agree to a fair contract that includes the fair wages and working conditions security guards deserve.”
The anonymous Penn security guard echoed a similar sentiment regarding the importance of training for security guards.
“If you want us to protect and do the things that we need to do, then we need certain criteria to be able to do that. One is training,” the security guard said.
Eddie Kadhi, the communications spokesperson for the union, emphasized the role of security in
said. “Not only professionally, but that they really trust each other. I have to say that this trust might not be broken — but it is not intact.”
Following this conversation, the event opened up to questions from the audience.
When asked about the current vacancy in the U.S.
According to College first year Gweneth Wiest, College Foundations is “a space where failure is encouraged, which is rare in many classes.”
“That atmosphere makes it easier to take risks, ask questions, and actually understand the material instead of just memorizing it for a test,” Wiest wrote in a statement to the DP.
Students also praised the program’s flexibility and the general feeling of support from instructors.
“At least once a week, [our] professor Masao Sako has conversations with us — ‘What are you thinking of the class; what can I do to make it better?’” College first year Will Migas said of his “Key” course. “He’ll shorten the lab if we say it’s too long.”
He added that the program “offers a lot of support — career fairs [and] one-on-one counseling — to help us get through.”
Still, students noted some areas for improvement.
College first year Jace Lee said that the “Key” course “teaches too much math” and “should teach more concepts.” He described the class as a “little too technical” for beginners.
Dong said that “the number of readings could definitely improve” while discussing the course book that each “Kite” student receives.
“I come into class and I know what I’ve read, but I don’t really have my own interpretation or understanding of what the reading actually means,” Alkhoori said.
Doraszelski said that lecture attendance “has been slipping” and that “lectures just haven’t really tied in so much with the labs.”
Other students viewed the challenges as part of the natural growth of the pilot program.
“It started out a little difficult, but it’s gotten better with the suggestions that we’ve offered,” Migas said. “Despite it being difficult at points, it’s
protecting students and staff, including at hospitals.
“It can be very difficult,” Kadhi told the DP.
“You see people on their worst days, with gunshot wounds, people coming for rehabilitation, all kinds of crazy things these officers are dealing with. [Allied Universal and the universities] think it’s okay to just offer pennies instead of dollars for these workers, and we’re saying it’s not.”
32BJ SEIU stressed that their concerns were with Allied Universal alone, and not other employers like Penn. The anonymous Penn security guard noted that Penn was “doing all that they can do,” emphasizing the University’s support from the
Ambassador to Germany position and its impact on the transatlantic relationship, Habeck reiterated that ambassadorial relations play a key role in enabling close, on-the-ground cooperation between countries.
“That indication of trust — I would say it’s invaluable,” Habeck said.
very much graded on how willing you are to want to learn.”
Some students also criticized the lack of information provided to students prior to committing to the program.
“I had no idea what it was going to be going into it,” Doraszelski said. “They’re trying to sell it, but they should just say what it was. I wish the communication was more clear, because no one knew what it was.”
Alkhoori also said that the program “wasn’t really anything like [it was] described,” emphasizing the difference between the email that announced the pilot program and the eventual class.
“You’re given the choice whether you want to or don’t want to,” Alkhoori said. “They didn’t really present what we’re actually doing, so that’s why I picked it.”
Most students were divided on whether College Foundations should expand to all first years. Katzenberger said she would “absolutely” recommend it, calling it “a great way to gain a general foundation in liberal arts.”
Lee, though, said that the expansion “would do more harm than good,” noting that the program only worked well for students who “don’t actually know what they want to do.”
“I think the whole point is that it’s general education — it could apply to someone who wants to be a Spanish major, and equally to someone who wants to do astrophysics,” Doraszelski said.
College first year Sahithi Konatham also said that the program has been central to her Penn experience.
“I don’t think that it should be mandatory, but I do think that it should be more openly available,” Konatham said. “I can’t imagine my first-year experience any other way.”
inception of the union.
“Not only did [Penn] stand beside us, the students and staff stood beside us,” the security guard said. “I believe that they’re doing everything that they can do, and they’re in with us.” The security guard emphasized the negative impact a strike and lack of security workers would have for the University community.
“We are the first responders to any situation before it can get to Penn police … or Philadelphia Police,” they said. “I believe that if we [were] to strike … It would hurt the staff, students, employees, and the officers.”
All members of the University community are invited to bring topics for consideration to UNIVERSITY COUNCIL
OPEN FORUM
Wednesday, December 3, 2025 4:00 p.m.
Hall of Flags, Houston Hall
A PennCard is required to attend University Council meetings
PennCard holders who want to be assured of speaking at Open Forum must submit a request to the Ofce of the University Secretary (ucouncil@pobox.upenn.edu) by 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, November 10, 2025, briefy indicating the subject of the intended remarks. Speakers’ statements are limited to three minutes and should be framed to present topics of general University interest and be directed to University Council as a body through the moderator, and not to an individual.
Tose who have not submitted a timely request to the Ofce of the University Secretary will be permitted to speak at the discretion of the moderator of University Council if time remains afer the registered speakers.
For the meeting format and guidelines for remarks, please consult the University Council website at https://secretary.upenn.edu/univ-council/open-forum.
Te Ofce of the University Secretary can be contacted at ucouncil@pobox.upenn.edu or 215-898-7005
CHENYAO LIU | SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER
The union representing Penn’s security officers held numerous rallies throughout Philadelphia on Oct. 27.
CHENYAO LIU | SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER
PWH hosted an event on the transatlantic partnership between Western Europe and the United States on Oct. 28.
Perfect partners are paradoxical
Fall is said to be the season of change. Perhaps that’s why all I’ve been seeing on my feed as of late is the dreaded “October theory” — the idea that October is the time of year with the most drastic life developments, and therefore the worst relationship drama. And judging by the waves of breakups and situationships that I’ve seen around me, that theory feels hard to dismiss.
Of course, Penn’s no stranger to relationship drama. A recent study indicates that 91% of college students feel as though their lives are dominated by hookup culture, and as the so-called “Social Ivy,” that statistic is especially fitting here. Even among our fellow Ivies, which share our demographics and academic environment, Penn stands out. We have by far the lowest reported marriage rates, especially compared to the whopping 50% of Princeton
graduates who end up married to another Princeton graduate.
These statistics seem to suggest that we Penn students are superficial, non-committal, and addicted to easy gratification. However, while there may be some level of truth to be found in those claims, our tendency to be dissatisfied with both extremes (hookups and marriage) suggests that the issue is much more nuanced than it appears.
What I see at the heart of this struggle is what I’d call the “paradox of the perfect partner” — believing that true love must be perfect in every way inversely discourages us from taking dating seriously at all. Rather than encouraging us to commit to our relationships, the pressure of this belief instead causes us to find flaws in partners where they don’t exist, pushing us away from potential connections out of fear that
they aren’t perfect. So where do our inflated expectations come from? Part of the answer is social media. Generation Z grew up scrolling on platforms that constantly inundated us with romantic advice, whether they be cautionary horror stories or overly rosy fairytales. TikTok trends like “I hate my boyfriend” nitpick and exaggerate the most trivial of issues, encouraging breakups rather than conflict resolution. At the same time, the curation offered by social media presents picturesque couples who seem to live in an eternal honeymoon phase.
When combined, these polar opposites distort our perception of love, turning relationships into a false binary of either being toxic or cinematic, but never ordinary. With such polarized expectations, it feels as though a proper relationship should instantly fix all of our problems, brighten our lives, and never make mistakes. The irony is that this standard is impossible, and by expecting it, we see real relationships — which require effort and constant compromise — as flawed and undeserving of our time.
Social media also pushes the narrative that we should always prioritize our own time over our partner’s time. Influencers will often make claims like “your 20s are for you, not for love” or “don’t waste your time with someone who isn’t perfect,” feeding into our natural desire to favor ourselves. For us as Penn students, ever engrossed in the preprofessional life, this narrative is ridiculously alluring. Believing that every argument or pet peeve constitutes grounds to end a relationship allows us to rationalize staying casual, as we talk ourselves into believing
How to lose a job in 10 days
CHARLOTTE’S WEB | Your private story isn’t that private
There’s nothing like the dopamine rush you get when that little heart pops up on your post. The feeling when someone likes, comments, or shares your post is euphoric, and, momentarily, it makes you wonder why anyone has ever criticized social media. After all, everybody’s on it: posting, reposting, and scrolling. But even with how normalized the apps have become, it seems there is still a lot we have to learn about how to behave online.
A few weeks ago, a first-year student posted a video on their private Snapchat story repeatedly using racial slurs and spewing hateful statements. The video quickly took campus by storm, and soon it was all over social media — and so was the student’s full name, dorm number, and old videos of them from high school. While Penn is still deciding what institutional consequences the student should face, the social consequences are clear: Clubs, other students, internships, and jobs won’t want the student associated with them. That student has ruined their life. Aside from the anger the student body is experiencing, there’s also the burning question: How could a student smart enough to get into an Ivy League, a student who spent years working for these opportunities, choose to throw it all away over a Snapchat story?
We tend to feel safer than we should online.
We treat posting like our personal journal, often revealing too much information. There’s this idea that the online world and the real world are two separate things, which gives
people a lot of confidence while posting, when in reality these worlds are entirely intertwined. Because of the false separation, people don’t realize the consequences of their online activity.
Your social media presence has a very real impact on your academic and professional life. Penn has a code of conduct outlining regulations for students. Most students don’t realize that Penn has “time, place, and manner” guidelines that change the punishment of hateful expression based on context. If a student breaks the code, punishment could range from academic probation to expulsion. But any disciplinary action hinders your academic future, especially regarding internships or graduate
Abolish Wharton
“How can my child transfer to the Wharton School?”
The Kite and Key tour guides notoriously tally some version of this question across each day’s campus tours. Its framing — Wharton as an aspirational alternative to declining values of liberal arts education — reflects the semiotic power of the world’s top business school. The notion that a business education at Penn is intrinsically superior to the liberal arts has been materially disastrous. The University, the world, and Wharton students themselves would all benefit from the abolition of Wharton’s undergraduate division.
The first of its kind, Wharton’s undergraduate school sought to offer an alternative to the millennia-old liberal arts education whose goals were building well-rounded citizen-subjects. Fundamentally, undergraduate business education is premised upon replacing the traditional training of worldly knowledge, engagement across perspectives, and evaluation of claims with skills-driven education in accounting, finance, management, and business economics. Business education shifts the impetus of job training from the market to the University, a concept unthinkable before Wharton’s founding in 1881.
This program has proven fabulously effective at creating top-notch consultants and financial professionals, but it is bankrupt in the production of people. An education at Wharton isn’t building adults ready to engage with the world, but rather workers most equipped to maximize profit — an economic proposition instead of a
human one.
Wharton students go on to work at the firms that have remade the American economy through endless financialization since the 1970s. They spend lifetimes at the companies denying your grandmother’s medical coverage, laying off your father, and raising your energy bills. For these crimes, they are celebrated and emulated. It is a plague on this institution that the moral character of one’s postgraduate professional life is silenced by the offer of a sixfigure salary. Rather than question the premises upon which the private sector has achieved domination over public life (or gain the ability to do so through the faculties developed in undergraduate education), students are trained in the private sector’s interests. By contrast, the liberal arts are beautiful. They are generative. While liberal arts institutions have long been places of immense contradiction, simultaneously tools of empire and ideologues of liberation, the promise of their education acknowledges that people are made, that reason is trained, that compassion is taught. Disciplinary knowledge is the vehicle to understanding the world, rather than the final goal. To the liberal arts, knowledge is an instrument in becoming. An opening to multiple futures. It is education at its best, far from the allegations of singular perspective thrust in the compact championed by two Wharton alumni, Marc Rowan and Donald Trump. Rowan’s criticisms of indoctrination should really be levied at Wharton, but, of course,
that our career takes precedence over our partner. This mindset helps explain Penn’s institutionalized hookup culture, but it doesn’t justify why we continue to yearn for love instead of giving up on it altogether. That aspect comes from our desire to SABS, or “see and be seen,” in the context of romance. At Penn, appearances carry enormous weight; whether we purposefully put ourselves on display in public spaces or carefully curate our social lives, there’s a constant pressure to radiate composure and success. And since this attitude is deeply pervasive, being seen with a partner, and especially being seen with many partners, has turned into a performative act meant to broadcast desirability. The relationship itself, then, can matter less than the fact that it’s perceived by others. In a word, the inability of Penn students to find a relationship beyond a casual fling stems from the same impulse that drives our academic lives: the need for overachievement. We seek out only the best and dedicate as little time as possible to anything we deem as less, preventing us from investing the effort that real, committed relationships require. But if we want to move past this cycle, we have to abandon the ideal of a perfect partner and come to terms with the fact that though love will never be flawless, those imperfections make it valuable.
ANDY MEI is a College first year from Palo Alto, Calif. studying economics and history. His email is andymei@sas. upenn.edu.
school. That picture of you holding a red solo cup or that video of you admitting slightly more than you should may seem harmless now, but it’s never inconsequential — not at Penn and not in the professional world.
Once you begin working at an establishment, every part of your life becomes affiliated with them. You agree to be a representative of that company, and they have the right to represent themselves as they see fit. Your online activity — new posts, old posts, and even content you didn’t post but are still pictured in becomes part of that representation. If your content doesn’t reflect the company’s values, it could result in a serious career risk.
The internet truly is forever. While you may
feel that your private posts online stay private, that is most often not the case. Once you post something, it’s open for people to share, screenshot, or simply talk about. After all, you’re posting for others to see, and once someone sees something, it often can’t be unseen. It’s always a good idea to take a step back and think about what you’re posting and how it might impact your future self. No amount of regret can erase something from the internet. The only way is to stop it before it even starts. Maybe the biggest issue with online activity creating real-world scandals is the lack of accountability. In general, we tend to shift the blame away from ourselves to avoid consequences or protect our dignity. But the truth is, an Ivy League student should know better than to jeopardize their entire future. With our knowledge and education, we should be able to make judgment calls when it comes to how we represent ourselves; we need to start taking accountability. No more using our youth as an excuse to impact our future, no more arguing that “it was just one post,” no more pretending that the online world doesn’t affect us. We have to take pride in how we represent ourselves now, so we don’t have to regret it in the future.
CHARLOTTE PULICA is a College first year from Enoch, Utah studying criminology and economics. Her email is cpulica1@sas.upenn.edu.
those concerned with “indoctrination” tend to ally with the hallowed halls of capital. Whether profit is “good” is not an object of study. It’s taken as truth and never reckoned with. Promoting the collective good is treated as a small part of the calculus of organizing society, instead of its central goal. Wharton can pretend to offer the world a service, but the truth is clear: Its dogma hollows its students and enriches the ultra-wealthy.
This is not something that can be reformed. As long as Wharton’s hyper-visible exterior markers of success exist, its ethos will be replicated by students conditioned on elite reproduction. Six of the other seven Ivy League schools do not offer undergraduate business degrees, and they do not suffer from the rot that Wharton brings onto our campus. As long as we institutionally back business education, the slowness required to mull on the questions of being alive will be eschewed for a fourth coffee chat and eighteenth job application. “Education” and universities will continue to be career credential-ers, the gateways for top companies, instead of places of making and remaking the self.
This is not to say that the College of Arts and Sciences, or the liberal arts, are perfect. The College’s evil alumni list includes the ranks of Elon Musk, the richest man in the world. Nor will I pretend liberation will ring from the halls of a place premised on maintaining the power of the upper class. But true education has no chance to succeed with the dome of Huntsman Hall looming overhead. A re-grounding
in liberal arts is a minimum step to dampen the social ill that emanates from Penn. Business students and their spiritual allies across the University have given up the greatest opportunity college offers: personal and intellectual development. It is clear to anyone not blinded by shiny objects that undergraduate business education is a failed experiment. It’s time to abolish Wharton.
undergraduate curriculum,
that it
and
is a College junior studying History and English from Atlanta. His email is niheerp@sas.upenn. edu.
NIHEER PATEL
KATE AHN | SENIOR DESIGNER
AVI SINGH | DP FILE PHOTO
Columnist Charlotte Pulica discusses the role of social media in personal reputation.
HANS BODE | STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER Columnist Niheer Patel critiques Wharton’s
arguing
impedes progress for students
the world at large.
Columnist Andy Mei explores the connection between Penn students’ pursuit of overachievement and the dynamics of campus hookup culture.
The art of no deal: Why Trump cannot be negotiated with
DOUBLE TAKES | You cannot reason with someone whose weapon is the conversation itself
Like many students, I felt a surge of Penn pride when Penn President Larry Jameson announced the rejection of the White House’s “Compact for Academic Excellence.” After the University’s embarrassing show of acquiescence this summer — when Penn complied with the Department of Education’s new Title IX demands — Penn being among the first universities to take a stand against the most blatant executive overreach felt like principle had been restored.
However, while universities like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Brown University offered unapologetic disavowals of compromising their autonomy in admissions, campus discourse, and values surrounding student identity and belonging, Penn took a more careful posture by offering the White House a litany of
feedback “highlighting areas of existing alignment.” The letter in response to the compact reads less like a staunch defense of academic freedom and more like a polite peer review of the Education Department’s encroachment.
On the surface, we should be glad that our University leadership, entrusted with a $25 billion endowment and the well-being of more than 20,000 students, opts for diplomacy over hostility. But Penn won’t find a seat at the table that President Donald Trump’s White House built for humiliation, not negotiation. Trump and his lieutenants understand that breaking public trust in universities pays dividends for decades. Agreeing to a compromise with Penn would only legitimize the kind of elite institution that threatens Trump’s vision for a government with minimal oversight and maximal loyalty. The goal wasn’t
Schrödinger’s judge
simply to shape higher education in the image of the right; it was to make elite universities outright despised. The most visible means of accomplishing this has been through a campaign to delegitimize the institution’s scientific research into climate change and vaccines, casting them as factories of “liberal indoctrination.” But the longer, more effective play has been more subtle: to make universities discredit themselves. Trump and his allies have learned that you don’t need to shut down an institution you can hollow out from within. The project is to turn universities against their own elitism and insularity, to let them equivocate when moral clarity is needed, and to confuse diplomacy for virtue.
It works because institutions like Penn are built to negotiate. They rely on slow consensus building and the comforts of committee governance. They speak the language of “dialogue” and “engagement” even when the other side is acting in bad faith. That is the contradiction of Penn’s elite bureaucracy: It preaches moral courage but practically commits to caution, celebrating inclusion but fearing the conflict necessary to maintain it. Trumpism weaponizes that instinct by forcing schools to defend their hypocrisy instead of their rhetorical convictions. So far, Penn has obliged.
Throughout the Amy Wax controversy, the University hesitated between moral clarity and bureaucratic caution, unable to decide between firing Wax for prejudice or taking an absolutist stand behind the principle of free speech and tenure. When transgender athletes like Lia Thomas became national targets, the University hid behind compliance instead of pursuing a winnable legal battle. Time and time again, when Trump’s White House overstepped, the University mistook civility for wisdom — ceding political ground to an adversary, not a partner. Still, Penn’s sometimes frustrating procedural culture is worth defending: Elite universities remain one of the few places where truth is thought of as a public good, not a partisan one. To defend Penn’s elite system is not to defend privilege, but to demonstrate the idea that insulated deliberation, when bound by ethics, helps serve everyone. The alternative, Trump’s vision, is where knowledge itself becomes political property. What is
reassuring is Penn has sought to fight back: Unprecedented spending to lobby Congress and amicus briefs filed to protect research funding signal that University leadership is aware of the threat to higher education that the Trump White House poses. The problem isn’t an unwillingness to fight, but rather a misunderstanding about how to overcome. Penn’s leadership assumes this is a policy disagreement to settle rather than a legitimacy conflict to be won. Elite universities are not accustomed to thinking in these existential terms. Penn and peer institutions have enjoyed decades of friendly relations with the federal government. Their instinct is to manage, not mobilize. But this moment demands a different posture; the object cannot merely be to “ride out” this president. For once this presidency is up, the next populist will seek to further exploit the cracks Trump exposed. That is why Penn must follow from Trump’s own playbook and turn it against him, to learn the “art of no deal.”
The task is not to negotiate better, but to stop negotiating altogether on questions that concede the premise of federal say over academic life. Every round of dialogue and every “stakeholder conversation” grants legitimacy to a government that seeks not compromise but capitulation. The University’s responsibility is to end the charade and to reject the framing. Diplomacy is possible, but only from a position of strength. Penn might seek an alliance with other universities to engage with the Education Department in solidarity instead of responding in isolation. But by now it should be clear: Penn must recognize that the dialogue itself has become the weapon. Trump cannot be negotiated with. And if Penn keeps mailing conciliatory letters to Washington, it will learn that what it called dialogue was simply participation in its own undoing.
SOHUM SHETH is a College first year from Jacksonville, Fla. studying philosophy, politics, and economics. His email is sheth0@sas.upenn. edu.
EDENLIGHTENED | Judicial retention elections threaten the very thing they seek to protect — judicial fairness
In less than one week, it will be Election Day. Here in Pennsylvania, an election for president will not be on the ballot, nor will elections for Congress, governor, or state leadership. This has not stopped $8 million from being raised and spent in the three retention elections for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, marking a state record.
Why are these races so important? Because they can tip the power balance of the court in one fell swoop. All three judges on the ballot this year are Democrats, and if they lose their retention elections, the court could very well end up in a deadlock for two years in light of the current partisan makeup of Harrisburg’s other two branches of government. Such a paralysis of a state’s judiciary is only made possible by the asinine system that is judicial elections.
Unlike the federal judiciary, where the executive branch nominates judges and the Senate confirms them, state courts, with the exception of eight states, engage in some form of judicial elections. In the case of Pennsylvania, judges are elected and retained in partisan elections every 10 years. Such a practice makes a mockery of judicial independence.
Elections are inherently compromising since judges will produce partisan outcomes. You don’t bite off the hand that feeds you. The reason why Republicans are bankrolling the “Vote No” campaign is precisely because all three judges are Democrats, stopping them would stop the “liberal” agenda they push. The exact same logic applies to Democrats. Their political action committees and Super PACs want the three judges in power because they rule in a way that warms the cockles of liberal hearts. Judges aren’t supposed to be partisan, yet retention elections force them to be partisan to keep their jobs. It isn’t just political parties. Businesses, unions, and lawyers have increasingly played a role in the election of judges. In this year’s court election, over half of the funds raised by the incumbent three judges’ individual
campaigns came from unions and lawyers. Meanwhile, the opposition to retention has been largely backed by the Commonwealth Leaders Fund, a pro-business PAC.
Although all political donations carry the risk of bias, lawyers, businesses, and unions are probably the litigants to most often appear before the courts. Thus, their influence in judicial elections is a sign of the impartiality of the court further eroding.
When the first judicial elections were introduced, they sought to make judges independent from “ideology and special interests.” In theory, judicial elections meant the judges were getting their orders from the voting public, but in reality, voters often don’t have a remote sense of what they’re voting for. Judges are banned from discussing the merits of cases with or before them. This means that there are few ways to evaluate a judge’s job performance without resorting to partisan bias. Given the clear knowledge gap, it is hard to see how elections are a good way to produce fair and impartial judges.
Judges know this. A survey found that 85% of judges believed no more than 30% of voters can make an informed choice. This has led them to engage in harsh sentencing and all sorts of bizarre displays to buff up their “tough on crime” brand. This distortion of judicial behavior reveals the perverse incentives built into electoral accountability. When judges believe their job security depends on appearing “tough,” justice becomes a performance rather than a principle. The federal nature of the United States means that these state court decisions are the end of the road, and the distortions that arise from democratic elections end up becoming permanent, entrenching an unjust system.
One could argue that appointed judges are no better. They only need to be confirmed by the legislature and they are set for life. There is no accountability from the people, and impeachments require overwhelming support from all parts of the political spectrum. But
appointed judges are known quantities being chosen by people with known leanings. You know your senator’s political stripes, and you know their backroom negotiations accounted for all the dirty secrets of nominees. As well, elected judges could be wildly visionary jurists or they could just be really good at campaigning.
An elected judiciary, despite supposedly providing accountability to the people, is vulnerable to the information asymmetry that comes with judicial privacy. Appointments aren’t glorious, but closed systems have internal checks that keep the quality of judges at a certain level. Given the federal nature of the United States,
relying on a democratic, informational, and asymmetrical exercise means courts with serious baggage and compositional impurities will have the last word in many cases and overturn established precedent. Retention elections are a recipe for the stripping of rights and dealing of repeated setbacks to democracy itself.
EDEN LIU is a College sophomore from Taipei, Taiwan studying philosophy, politics, and economics. His email is edenliu@sas.upenn.edu. Penn students:
Please do not stay silent on reproductive rights
everyday policy debates that directly affect people’s health and autonomy. Take House Bill 1140, for example, a measure that would require insurance companies to cover all contraceptive services at no cost to the patient. The bill has passed the state House but is currently in the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee. At this time, Pennsylvania has no state-level protections for contraception access, leaving residents vulnerable to potential changes in federal policy, like bans on Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, Medicaid cuts and work requirements, and the withholding of Title X grants.
Nine out of 10 women in the United States will use contraception at some point in their lives — access to birth control allows women to finish their degrees, succeed in their careers, plan their reproductive futures, and manage conditions like heavy or irregular periods. In a state where 80% of residents live in a county without an abortion provider, the ability to access contraception without financial barriers isn’t just important — it’s essential.
right under Pennsylvania law. Where federal protections have fallen short, the court is defending access and laying the groundwork for lasting reproductive rights in Pennsylvania.
But the truth is, even with a governor who supports reproductive rights and a Democratic majority in the state House, Pennsylvania still lacks the most basic protections for contraception and postpartum care.
The state House may be beautiful, but it’s what happens inside that matters most. If you believe healthcare should be affordable and evidence-based, now is the time to act. Call your legislators. Ask them to support House Bill 1140, House Bill 1088, and House Bill 1234. And don’t stop there — reproductive freedom in Pennsylvania depends on who sits on our courts. The three state Supreme Court justices up for retention this year have consistently protected access to abortion and contraception when it’s been challenged. Keeping them on the bench is just as vital as passing new laws.
surrounded by murals and mosaics, I couldn’t help but think about how easy it is to take access for granted when you live in a place like Philadelphia, a healthcare mecca. But for millions of Pennsylvanians, what happens inside that building determines whether contraception, prenatal care, and postpartum monitoring are affordable or completely out of reach.
There is a lot of talk on reproductive healthcare in Pennsylvania right now, especially with the upcoming state Supreme Court race and the 2026 gubernatorial election taking shape. What often gets lost are the
The state’s highest court has also emerged as a key defender of reproductive rights in our commonwealth. In a landmark 2024 decision, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that a decades-old law prohibiting Medicaid from covering most abortions is “presumptively unconstitutional” under the state constitution’s Equal Rights Amendment because it discriminates on the basis of sex by denying women the same access to pregnancy-related care that Medicaid covers for childbirth. That ruling sent the case back to the lower court for further review and signaled that reproductive autonomy may soon be recognized as a fundamental
As Penn students, we can’t take our own access for granted — not when so many across the state are still fighting for it. Our voices and our votes can make the difference between progress and regression. Pennsylvania’s laws and courts should reflect the compassion, evidence, and justice that already exist among its people.
KYLER McVAY is a 2019 College graduate and fourth-year MD student at the Perelman
of Medicine. Her email is kymcvay@sas.upenn. edu
SANJANA JUVVADI | STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER
JEAN PARK | DP FILE PHOTO
NATHANIEL SIRLIN | STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER
School
Columnist Eden Liu argues that Pennsylvania’s judicial retention elections compromise the independence of the judiciary.
Columnist Sohum Sheth argues that under the Trump administration, universities like Penn should not engage in negotiation as a path to consensus.
Guest columnist Kyler McVay urges the Penn community to speak out in support of reproductive rights across Pennsylvania.
Down the ballot: A guide to the 2025 Pennsylvania elections
The Pa. Supreme Court race has drawn national attention. Here’s what you need to know
The DP spoke with civil liberties organizations, legal experts, and scholars to understand the long-term implications of the race
PAIGE RAWISZER Staff Reporter
On Nov. 4, Pennsylvania voters will have the opportunity to decide whether or not to retain three Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices in a race that has drawn increased national political attention.
The election of Democratic justices Christine Donohue, David Wecht, and Kevin Dougherty comes as judicial retention elections across the country face increasing scrutiny. The Daily Pennsylvanian spoke with civil liberties organizations, legal experts, and scholars to understand the long-term implications of the race.
In the past, retention elections in Pennsylvania have not been seen as competitive or noteworthy races, according to University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Senior Fellow David Rudovsky. Rudovsky said in an interview with the DP that, historically, 99% of judges in Pennsylvania have been retained.
He emphasized, though, that judicial retention election races have taken on a new, “politicized” front in which opposing parties have encouraged voters to vote against judges, “often with a lot of false information about how they voted.”
So far, millions of dollars have been spent on campaigns and advertising. The Wisconsin State Supreme Court race drew over $100 million in spending.
“It reflects what is going on in this country in terms of political divisiveness and judges who now have to, interestingly, run on their record,” he said. He also stated that the issues brought before the judges can contribute to the politicization of their retention.
“The whole system has become very politicized in the last few years in terms of state Supreme Court justices because they rule on election issues, they rule on criminal justice issues, they rule on all the kinds of hot-button points that split this country,” Rudovsky said.
the DP that the “partisan composition” of the Court is “at stake” — and could impact future rulings on various issues.
If
are blocked by the state Senate, Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court will remain in an ideological stalemate with two Democrats and two Republicans. Voters will not be able to elect judges to the state Supreme Court until November 2027.
The race has garnered concerns about the repercussions of a stalemate court ahead of the 2028 presidential election. Historically, justices retain their seats. In Pennsylvania history, only one statewide judge has lost a retention election. However, Democrats have expressed worry this November as leading Republicans are speculated to be pouring money into judicial campaigns, urging people to vote “no” on retention.
The first judge up for retention is Christine Donohue, who was elected to the court in 2015. Donohue, who is currently 72 years old, will have to step down in 2027 even if she is reelected due to the court’s retirement age of 75. Donohue started her career as a civil trial litigator before serving on the Superior Court of Pennsylvania for eight years. During her time on the state Supreme Court, Donohue upheld lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic and was part of the court’s unanimous vote to uphold the results of the 2020 presidential election. Her retention is recommended by the Pennsylvania Bar Association, and she is backed by several local labor unions and Democratic leaders.
Kevin Dougherty was also elected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2015. Since then, he has worked on a behavioral health initiative that aims to reform how state courts respond to people with mental health disorders and substance abuse problems.
In a more contentious ruling, Dougherty joined the court’s two Republican justices in deciding that mail-in ballots need to be dated, and that this requirement is not
recommended by the Pennsylvania Bar Association. Superior Court of Pennsylvania
One of Pennsylvania’s intermediate appellate courts is the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, which hears cases before they move to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. The court primarily considers appeals on criminal and civil cases.
Democrat Alice Beck Dubow — who graduated from the College of Arts and Sciences in 1981 and the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School in 1984 — is the one state Superior Court judge up for retention this year. Beck Dubow was elected to the state Superior Court in 2015 after a 20-year career that included serving as general counsel for Drexel University.
In her first term, Beck Dubow ruled that a speeding driver who killed three people should be resentenced to life in prison, and a former school police officer who sexually assaulted four students should also serve life in prison. The Pennsylvania Bar Association recommends Beck Dubow’s retention.
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court is the second intermediate appellate court and is made up of nine judges who preside over civil actions brought against the commonwealth.
The court currently has five elected Republican judges and three elected Democrats, leaving one spot open. Stella Tsai, a Democrat and 1988 Penn
leases and energy companies that need help with environmental compliance. Wolford comes highly recommended by the Pennsylvania Bar Association and is backed by Gun Owners of America, law enforcement groups, state Republican leaders, and Conservative Latinos PA. Democrat Michael Wojcik is also up for a retention vote after his first 10-year term. He is best known for a 2023 ruling — which reversed his previous opinion — asserting the court lacked jurisdiction to decide whether the state House’s four impeachment articles against Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner were constitutional. Wojcik’s retention is recommended by the Pennsylvania Bar Association. Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas
The Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas is divided into three divisions responsible for criminal cases, domestic and juvenile relations, and the orphans’ court. In Philadelphia, the court is composed of 101 judges. This election, 11 judges are running for their first terms, and 13 are up for retention.
The candidates for election — who are all Democrats — are Will Braveman, Sarah Jones, Deborah WatsonStokes, Kia Ghee, Irina Ehrlich, Larry Farnese, Leon King II, Brian Kisielewski, Anthony Stefanski, Joseph Russo, and Jennifer Santiago.
All candidates are recommended by the Philadelphia Bar Association except Russo, who declined to participate in the review process.
The candidates for retention are Gwendolyn Bright, Ann Butchart, Scott DiClaudio, Michael Fanning, Daine Grey Jr., Christopher Mallios, Walter Olszewski, Frank Palumbo, Rainy Papademetriou, Tracy Roman, Stephanie Sawyer, Susan Schulman, and Lyris Younge.
The Pennsylvania Bar Association has recommended all candidates for retention except Grey, who was not recommended, and DiClaudio, Palumbo, and Younge, who declined to participate.
Philadelphia Municipal Court
The Philadelphia Municipal Court is composed of 27 judges divided into three divisions. The Criminal Division tries adult criminals carrying a sentence of incarceration of five years or less; the Civil Division deals with small claims cases, landlord and tenant disputes, and real estate and tax cases; and the Traffic Division adjudicates traffic violations.
The candidates for election — all Democrats — are Amanda Davidson, Sherrie Cohen, Cortez Patton, and Michael Parkinson. Davidson and Parkinson were recommended by the Pennsylvania Bar Association, while Cohen and Patton were not.
The candidates for retention are David Conroy, Jacquelyn Frazier-Lyde, Henry Lewandowski, Wendy Pew, and T. Francis Shields.
All candidates were recommended for retention by the Philadelphia Bar Association except for Frazier-Lyde.
Penn Carey Law
“If you’re concerned about abortion rights, there’s no federal constitutional right to abortion anymore,” Roosevelt said. “But under Pennsylvania’s constitution, as interpreted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, there is, [but] that could change if you get a Republican majority.”
In addition to abortion questions, the court has the final say on many consequential issues, ranging from election administration to minority and workers’ rights.
“You’ve got the whole question of mail-in ballots and when they can be counted and received when there’s a slight error in which you wrote down,” Rudovsky said. “You’ve got all those issues percolating.
Certainly, the issues of abortion, rights of minorities, and so on and so forth come before the court. A lot of what they decide is on those issues.”
Election administration questions could prove to be crucial in upcoming national races, Roosevelt explained, adding that the court has the final say in how those elections are run.
“States conduct presidential elections, and there have been plenty of disputes in Pennsylvania about how those elections can be run and which votes are valid, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ends up often deciding those questions,” he said. “If you’re concerned about how the Pennsylvania election is going to be run, the composition of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is important to that, too.”
Danitra Sherman, the deputy advocacy and policy director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, similarly underscored the significance of the state judiciary, telling the DP that Pennsylvania rulings can impact subsequent rulings nationwide.
“Our state court … is worried about issues that are happening here within the state, but I think it’s also important to … talk about policies and setting precedent,” Sherman said. “It also can influence what is happening on a greater scale, whether it’s at the national level or in other states when it comes to the various issues.”
Both Sherman and Roosevelt discussed the importance of voting in retention elections and encouraged the Penn community to vote.
“This election could have lots of consequences that will affect you, affect everyone else, and affect the nation,” Roosevelt said. “If you care about any of those things, voting is important.” Sherman contended that judges’ 10-year terms make retention elections particularly significant. Within that time frame, she said, the judges will eventually rule on an issue that impacts every individual.
“While folks are living their best life or worried about school or not feeling like there is much to worry about now, who is to say that — come five or 10 years from now — there isn’t going to be an issue that you are impacted from,” Sherman said. Rudovsky echoed the importance of voting, emphasizing that the judicial elections deserve the same attention as state legislative and federal elections.
“In the same way they’re concerned about who the governor is and who their representatives are, and whether Republicans or Democrats or whatever, [voters] should understand that the judges and the justices, particularly on the Supreme Court, have an impact on those issues as well,” Rudovsky said.
David Berger Professor for the Administration of Justice Kermit Roosevelt also told
Cube offers 80,000 square feet comprising
basement levels and an atrium, presenting the opportunity to more than double the school’s current space.
A Wharton spokesperson neither confirmed nor denied the school’s plans to move when asked by the Chronicle and declined to comment on any future deal involving The Cube.
“We are continually looking for ways to increase our reach and access in the city,” the spokesperson said.
“Wharton has operated a campus in San Francisco for more than two decades, allowing us to educate thousands of students and engage countless alumni and industry supporters.”
Wharton has been operating out of San Francisco for 25 years. While located at Hills Plaza, the school has offered an Executive MBA program to cohorts up to 220 students.
Beginning this fall, Wharton will start to offer an artificial intelligence for business major to all of its fulltime MBA students. This offering will also be available to those partaking in Wharton’s Semester in San Francisco program for MBA students. The AI major will additionally be available to all Executive MBA students in the coming fall. The Cube is owned by New York-based Vornado
Realty Trust. Vornado’s vice president of leasing, Edward Riguardi, neither confirmed nor denied whether Wharton is partaking in lease negotiations with The Cube. The Cube is a part of the larger 555 California Street office complex, owned by Vornado Realty Trust and the Trump Organization — which owns a 30%
the property.
evaluating the
city’s Financial District.
ABHIRAM JUVVADI | STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER
Wharton is
possible relocation of its San Francisco campus to a building in the
‘Capstone of my career’: Penn professor Dorothy Roberts wins 2025 Bioethics Founders’ Award
Roberts is the founding director of the Penn Program on Race, Science, and Society and maintains appointments at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and the School of Arts and Sciences
SANDY WALLS Staff Reporter
Penn Integrates Knowledge University Professor Dorothy Roberts has been named the 2025 recipient of the Bioethics Founders’ Award by The Hastings Center for Bioethics.
Roberts is the founding director of the Penn Program on Race, Science, and Society and maintains appointments at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and the School of Arts and Sciences. She was presented with the award on Oct. 23 at the annual conference of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities in Portland, Ore.
“This [award] … is a capstone of my career in bioethics and social justice,” Roberts said in an interview with The Daily Pennsylvanian. “I’m retiring in June 2027, so it’s very gratifying to have this recognition at the end of my academic career.”
The ASBH extended the award to Roberts in recognition of her contributions to bioethics and the impact of her research on life sciences, medicine, and policymaking.
“This particular award is very meaningful to me, because The Hastings Center is one of the premier bioethics centers in the United States … that has always been on the cutting edge of pushing the boundaries of bioethics,” Roberts added. “Receiving the award represents how far bioethics has come in recognizing the essential importance of social justice and equality.”
The 2025 Bioethics Founders’ Award was also presented to John Harris, a professor emeritus at the University of Manchester. Harris is also the founding director of the International Association of Bioethics, a network that allows bioethicists from around the world to share their knowledge and resources with each other. The Hastings Center unanimously
JEOPARDY, from front page
University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School graduate Tom Devlin.
In an interview with The Daily Pennsylvanian, Mishra described the “shock and awe” that followed his comeback victory after a series of losses from the start of the game.
“I was really struggling early on to get control of the buzzer and kind of begin this slow ascent upwards,” Mishra said. “I think there was a moment in that game, especially early on,
recommended Roberts and Harris as the recipients of the award.
Roberts recalled how the ceremony’s audience consisted of “so many younger bioethicists … who [she encouraged] along the way.” She described hearing their applause as a “gratifying honor.”
Since 2011, Roberts has served as a fellow at The Hastings Center, where she has “learned a lot” from other fellows and discussed “very important issues,” including eugenics and genetic technologies.
Roberts also serves as the inaugural Raymond Pace and Sadie Tanner Mossell Alexander Professor of Civil Rights. Her research focuses on a variety of public policy issues, such as social justice, reproductive health, child welfare, and bioethics.
Her most recent book, titled “Torn Apart: How the Child Welfare System Destroys Black Families—And How Abolition Can Build a Safer World,” explored systemic racial biases within the child welfare system. Roberts also called for the abolition of the current welfare system which, she argued, has punished Black families.
When discussing her work on “Torn Apart,” Roberts told the DP that she intends to “continue to engage with activist organizations whose mission is to abolish family policing.”
In February, TIME magazine recognized Roberts as one of 25 Black leaders working to end the racial equity gap. In October 2024, Roberts was also named a 2024 MacArthur Fellow, winning the “Genius Grant.”
The honor is bestowed to individuals who demonstrate outstanding creativity in their field and whose research promises to yield significant advances with the help of the fellowship.
where I kind of resigned myself to the reality that it might not be successful, but I was able to keep my wits about me and play my game, and it worked out in the end.”
Mishra was able to regain ground during the “Double Jeopardy!” and “Daily Double” rounds, which put him in the position to win the game.
“Going into ‘Final Jeopardy’ … I decided to wager nothing and … pray that [Devlin] got the question wrong, which, fortunately enough for me, he did,” Mishra said. “It was a very crazy moment to win.”
Although Mishra said that he applied to the game show on a “whim,” he added that he had developed an interest in trivia during his time at
That year, Roberts also received the Martin Luther King Jr. Social Justice Award, a recognition issued as part of Penn’s annual Martin Luther King Jr. Commemorative Symposium on social change.
Roberts is set to publish a memoir titled “The Mixed Marriage Project” next year. The book will tell the
Penn, where he joined a Quizzo team.
Mishra received the call inviting him to participate in July. Soon after, he recalled spending “a very intense 45 days” preparing for the show, which was taped in September. At the time, he was on a backpacking trip and postponed the start date of his consulting job to plan strategies for the competition.
His preparation included utilizing his computer science minor from Penn to analyze the archives of past clues from the show, such as what topics were most frequently discussed. He also spent time focusing on his wagering strategy.
According to Mishra, though, most of his
story of her childhood as part of an interracial family in Chicago during the 1960s.
Roberts highlighted that the memoir asks a set of questions that “ties together all of my work over my career,” including how “we love each other as equal human beings in a deeply racist society.”
success came from accumulating knowledge from those around him — an approach he described as the result of “being a lifelong learner.” “They don’t really give you anything in terms of preparation materials,” he added. “It’s literally just the wealth of human knowledge.” Mishra also discussed the relationships he formed with his fellow contestants.
“[Devlin is] a very brilliant man,” he said. Mishra also developed a friendship with Pohribnij, whom he described as “incredibly nice.” Mishra joins a list of other Penn affiliates who have won “Jeopardy!,” including College junior Rishabh Wuppalapati — the game’s 2024 champion.
PHOTO COURTESY OF PENN LAW
Roberts was named the 2025 recipient of the Bioethics Founders’ Award by The Hastings Center for Bioethics.
picks are in for football’s Halloween game against Brown
COTA , from back page
POWER , from back page
GRACE CHEN | SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER
Then-junior defensive linebacker Carter Janki pictured tackling Brown’s offense on Nov. 2, 2024.
Penn 24, Brown 17 — Valeri Guevarra, DP Sports editor
Penn 33, Brown 24 — Justin Lee, DP Sports editor
Penn 27, Brown 21 — Sonal Sukhatme, DP Sports associate
Penn 27, Brown 24 (OT) — Ellie Clark, DP Sports reporter
Penn 31, Brown 17 — Madison Knier, DP Sports reporter
Women’s soccer sophomore forward Lily White doesn’t take any moment for granted After
Senior goalkeeper Annabel Austen garners second Ivy League Defensive Player of the Week award of season
NOAH JEONG | STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER White pictured dribbling the ball against Dartmouth on Sept. 27.
GRACE CHEN | SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER Austen posed for a photo shoot on Oct. 31, 2024.
Senior distance runner Lara Cota found her ‘why’ with women’s cross country: Family
At the Paul Short Run, Cota rose over 70 places during the 6K race to fnish 55th with a personal-best time of 20:51.7
ELLIE CLARK Sports Reporter
Men’s basketball junior forward TJ Power day-to-day with upper-body injury, ‘shooting’ to play in season Power, an offseason transfer from Virginia, is the frst former fve-star recruit in program history
CONOR SMITH AND WALKER CARNATHAN Deputy Sports Editor and Former Sports Editor
football looks to bounce back against Brown on Friday The matchup is set to take place on Halloween under the Friday night lights
DANA BAHNG | SENIOR DESIGNER
PHOTO COURTESY OF VIRGINIA ATHLETICS
Power pictured playing during a matchup between Virginia and Duke on Feb. 17.
GRACE CHEN | SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER O’Brien pictured carrying the ball against Brown on Nov. 2, 2024
