Letters to the Editor | March 23, 2025

I applaud The Inquirer for once again shining a spotlight on the absurdity of the continued existence of the Philadelphia Sheriff’s Office and Registrar of Wills as elected offices. No fewer than five respected organizations — the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority (PICA), the city controller, the Committee of Seventy, the Philadelphia Bar Association, and The Inquirer — have called out problems at the sheriff’s office, including a lack of internal accounting controls, lack of sales of tax-delinquent properties, $40 million in uncollected taxes, serious operation and financial mismanagement, major problems with court security and prisoner transport, and decades of mismanagement through different sheriff regimes. Lack of action on the part of the mayor and City Council begs the question: What are they waiting for? The people of Philadelphia deserve answers to the lack of action. The silence is deafening.

Angelo Sgro, Philadelphia

Thank you to The Inquirer Editorial Board for its powerful stance against the death penalty. More voices must name capital punishment for what it is: violence masquerading as justice. Capital punishment. State-authorized execution. Death penalty. Electrocution. Lethal injection. Firing squad. No matter the method, the premise remains the same: killing in the name of justice. Packaging death as morally permissible rehabilitation doesn’t make it just, it only makes it easier to look away. In South Carolina, Brad Sigmon deserved better — even if the firing squad was his choice.

As a physician, I turn to the American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics. While Opinion 9.7.3 prohibits physician involvement in executions, the code went further last year, adopting formal opposition to all forms of capital punishment. Since then, at least 12 executions have occurred, some involving mental illness or inadequate counsel. In Missouri, Marcellus Williams was executed despite new DNA evidence and a clemency recommendation. The silence from organized medicine is troubling. Ethical leadership requires more than policy, it requires courage. Inaction in the face of injustice is its own kind of complicity.

Luis E. Seija, Philadelphia

I agree with the recent op-ed, “A fearful Penn ditches DEI. That’s not the way of leaders.” Shame on the University of Pennsylvania for meekly buckling under the Trump administration’s attacks by scrubbing references to the university’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs — apparently without a hint of pushback. Other academic institutions, such as Thomas Jefferson University, have issued statements reaffirming their institutional support for such efforts. Has Penn even taken steps to defend its DEI commitment in the courts? I don’t recall Penn previously having been shy to deploy legal teams to protect its prerogatives.

Like the op-ed author, I graduated from Penn. The university has always been eager to display its historical connection to Benjamin Franklin, the Founding Father, proud Philadelphia citizen, and American revolutionary. What would Franklin think about Penn’s timid response to the new administration’s antidemocratic agenda? If Penn previously committed itself to supporting DEI, what has happened to that commitment? One of Groucho Marx’s characters once quipped: “These are my principles. If you don’t like them, I have others.” It’s time for Penn’s leadership to channel less Groucho and more Ben.

John Ascenzi, Philadelphia

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 200 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.