The Daily Pennsylvanian letter on my recent op-ed, signed by some of my colleagues, puts forth no substantive argument and so requires no response on that score
Between August 22 and 28, while Penn freshmen enjoyed a gala at the art museum and Penn-themed ice sculptures, an estimated 23 people died from a drug overdose in the city of Philadelphia.
We write to condemn recent statements our colleague, Amy Wax, the Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at Penn Law, has made in popular media pieces.
At the beginning of this new academic year, I hope we all take a few moments to celebrate our campus community as the best and, ultimately, the only way forward to a better world.
Exactly one year ago, in its Columbia University decision, the National Labor Relations Board reconciled a decades-long inconsistency in employment law.
We, a group of Penn alumnae and current students, wish to address white supremacist violence and discourse in America.
Why are juniors and seniors spending 90 percent of their free time casing and networking and attending info sessions? Why aren’t we contemplating what we really want out of life, and how we can achieve it?
My parents took a risk. Two freshly minted Ph.D.'s, raised in poverty, leaving their home country, coming to America.
In the recent opinion article “Paying the price for breakdown of the country's bourgeois culture,” published in the Philadelphia Inquirer, law professors Amy Wax and Larry Alexander lament the loss of the “bourgeois cultural hegemony” of the 1950s.
As a community and as individuals we are shocked and saddened by the deadly, violent events in Charlottesville yesterday, and we grieve for the victims and their families.
“You have two months left to live.” The doctor delivered the words with a steel, monotone voice without looking up from his computer.
After the recent atrocities in Westminster, Manchester, and London, the politically correct in the United Kingdom and the world are yet again fully engaged in assiduously ignoring the threat we all face.
The facts are as plain as they are uncomfortable — the world is currently living through an unprecedented threat, a modern enemy fighting for an archaic, theocratic vision that president George W.
As a graduate student worker at the University of Pennsylvania, I research the politics of emotion as a member of the political science department.
On May 13, an article in the Daily Pennsylvanian discussed my intention to create a conversation over alumni weekend about President Trump’s association with the University, by wearing and offering pins that said “UPenn: Denounce Trump.” The online commentary mostly deplored my action, calling button bearers “snowflakes” and “adult children”. One said, “Most universities would be PROUD.” They deserve a response.
As a 50 year student of administrative science, I felt that Penn needed a “system power move”. (Defn: a high leverage, small action that makes a difference; exemplar: Pussy Riot.) I wanted reiterate the demand made by many others that the University to take a stand on Trump.
President Trump appears to have an indifferent, if not downright disdainful, attitude to the rule of law.
The economic system of free enterprise and our cherished democratic institutions depend on the certainty, stability, integrity, and legitimacy provided by the rule of law.
In last Wednesday’s paper Calvary Rogers argued in favor of increasing soft censorship in America and at Penn.
The Quattrone Center for the Fair Administration of Justice is a nonpartisan, national research and policy hub producing and disseminating research designed to prevent errors in the criminal justice system.
On April 29th, as part of the People’s Climate Movement, over 100,000 people will gather to march in Washington DC to demonstrate widespread and overwhelming support for immediate and drastic climate action.
Consider three individuals: a terrorist, whose indoctrination and violent actions result from a constant reminder throughout his upbringing of Western injustices and transgressions; a slavery apologist, who lives in the antebellum South, and validates his ideals by the norms and conventions of the time; an American who supports gun control, Keynesian economics, and a woman’s right to an abortion, but developed these beliefs solely through having friends and family affirm the “moral correctness” of these notions.