Professors and students in Texas are sounding alarms about a new law that is fostering self-censorship and restricting the scope of academic inquiry, leading some faculty and students to consider leaving their institutions. These concerns were raised during a news conference held on Tuesday, where educational advocates highlighted the adverse impacts of the legislation.
In contrast, Republican state senators on a committee, who had only heard from university administrators, commended the implementation of the higher education law, which has redefined governance on college campuses. The legislators expressed intentions to bolster the law further.
“There was a drumbeat that somehow the sky is falling,” asserted Senate Higher Education Committee Chair Paul Bettencourt, R-Houston, during the session focused on the application of several new higher education laws in Texas. “Well, the answer is no. And more importantly, we have record enrollment in higher education.”
The contrasting narratives unfolded at separate events at the Capitol: while professors, students, and education advocates argued that Senate Bill 37 was inflicting widespread damage on college campuses, university officials assured senators that the law was being implemented with minimal issues.
This legislation grants greater authority to governor-appointed regents over academic matters and university governance, including determining required courses for students. It also enhances their power in selecting campus leaders and faculty senates, which represent professors in university decision-making.
Initially, the bill sought to prohibit mandatory undergraduate courses from endorsing specific policies, ideologies, or legislation, but that language was subsequently removed. The final version mandates that such courses must equip students for civic and professional engagement, workforce readiness, and societal improvement.
Senate Bill 37 followed a 2023 law that prohibited diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives at public universities in Texas.
Coinciding with the enforcement of SB 37 in September, a secretly recorded video of a Texas A&M professor discussing gender identity heightened scrutiny of college curricula. In response, public university systems reviewed thousands of courses and instituted policies requiring professors to adhere to approved syllabi, obtain prior approval for lessons on race, gender, and sexuality, and present sensitive topics in a “balanced” manner.
During the Tuesday news conference, student Valentina Rivas Labarca shared her experience of transferring from the University of Texas at San Antonio due to the consolidation of its race, ethnicity, and gender studies program, a change she attributes to SB 37. She expressed her desire to escape a model that treats education as a “carefully managed career pipeline,” only to find similar modifications at the University of Houston.
The University of Houston is contemplating the elimination of 101 courses, representing approximately 40% of its current core curriculum offerings, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education. Faculty members caution that this loss of core status could severely diminish enrollment and potentially lead to the discontinuation of those courses.
“Censorship doesn’t always start with banning ideas,” Rivas Labarca noted. “Sometimes it begins by making those ideas impossible to study.”
The committee’s initial witness, Texas Tech University System Chancellor Brandon Creighton, who authored SB 37 and previously chaired the Senate Higher Education Committee, explained to his former colleagues how he enforces the law.
Creighton has characterized SB 37 as a “floor” rather than a ceiling on what university leaders can achieve. He mandated faculty to submit certain course content involving race, sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation for review, effectively restricting such content from core and most introductory courses while limiting it in advanced classes, and beginning to phase out related academic programs.
He informed senators that over 14,000 courses were reviewed, with 1,403 flagged for closer examination and 92 presented to the regents for review. Of those, the regents necessitated changes to 60. Creighton emphasized that less than 1% of the reviewed courses were altered.
However, Senator Royce West, D-Dallas, challenged Creighton on the removal of the Dred Scott case from a constitutional law course, a decision that has drawn scrutiny.
Creighton asserted that teaching the ruling was “in no way inhibited” by the system’s policies and that its removal was not directed by the regents. He committed to contacting the law school’s dean to address any misunderstandings about the review process.
“Studying Black history, discussing the realities of racism and treating every student with respect are not prohibited,” Creighton stated.
Faculty organizations suing Creighton and the regents cite this incident as indicative of the vague restrictions prompting professors to exclude material to avoid potential disciplinary action.
Before the hearing, biology professor Lisa B. Limeri, who resigned from Texas Tech University over the summer, explained why faculty might refrain from submitting materials for review. She shared that her team omitted information regarding the biology of sex from an introductory biology course.
“We were actually quite terrified of going through the formal process at the risk of bringing my name to the attention of the chancellor, who has to approve tenure, and so we opted to self-censor to protect our careers and our jobs,” she explained.
Limeri has since accepted a non-tenured position outside of Texas, asserting that Tech’s restrictions hindered her from delivering complete and scientifically accurate content.
Other university leaders maintained that SB 37 has prompted necessary evaluations of their academic offerings. University of North Texas System Chancellor Michael Williams referred to these reviews as “a very healthy thing,” noting plans at the flagship campus in Denton to cut or consolidate up to 70 majors, minors, and certificate programs with low enrollment.
“Much like Chancellor Creighton said, there’s always those who disagree,” Williams remarked. “But our job is to do the work the Legislature gives us, and that’s what we have done. I would say overall, from my perspective, it’s been a positive experience.”
Brandon Simmons, the state’s inaugural higher education ombudsman, testified about his office’s progress in investigating colleges. Established by SB 37, his role involves ensuring universities comply with the law and the ban on DEI programs, with the authority to compel cooperation and recommend financial penalties for non-compliance.
Simmons reported that his office had received 73 complaints and opened investigations into two cases, including allegations against Stephen F. Austin State University regarding a prohibited DEI program and discrimination against conservatives. University officials stated they comply with all state and federal laws and will cooperate fully with any investigations.
Simmons anticipates opening a third investigation once a complaint is appropriately submitted, involving further alleged DEI violations.
Students and university employees may be reluctant to report potential infractions due to fears of retaliation, Simmons noted. His office plans to establish a text-based complaint line and enhance public awareness of its work to encourage more individuals to come forward.
Senators are deliberating potential changes to oversight in higher education. When Senator Brent Hagenbuch, R-Denton, inquired whether substantiated violations should be referred to the attorney general instead of the committee, Bettencourt quipped that Simmons had hired three former attorneys from the attorney general’s office, suggesting a close connection.
Simmons responded that it is premature to recommend changes, as his office is still in the early stages of its first investigations.
Meanwhile, Higher Education Commissioner Wynn Rosser updated senators on another aspect of SB 37: a 14-member committee tasked with evaluating the core curriculum and determining if current credit hour requirements should be reduced. This committee will not decide on specific courses but will provide recommendations to the coordinating board by October, with a final report due to lawmakers by December 1.
Senators West and Carol Alvarado, D-Houston, raised concerns about whether Black and Hispanic students are benefiting from the state’s enrollment growth after the ban on DEI programs. Rosser indicated that enrollment at public colleges and universities increased across four tracked racial and ethnic groups from 2024 to 2025: by over 9% among Black students, around 5.3% among Hispanic students, nearly 4% among Asian students, and 1.5% among white students.
West cautioned that these state-wide increases do not necessarily reflect the performance of individual universities or ensure continued growth. He urged university officials to clarify the recruitment strategies contributing to these increases and how the enrollment of these groups compares to figures prior to the DEI ban.
When Alvarado later requested Black and Hispanic enrollment data from representatives of UH, Texas State, UT, and Texas A&M systems, they were unable to provide that information during the hearing.
