Translate

Showing posts with label Lily Kepner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lily Kepner. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 26, 2026

Stories behind UT’s now-closed ethnic and gender studies departments, by Lily Kepner, Staff WriterAug 24, 2026

Friends:

I want to call readers’ attention to an important and deeply concerning piece by Austin American-Statesman higher education reporter Lily Kepner, published August 24, 2026, documenting the histories—and now the disappearance as independent academic units—of four longstanding fields at the University of Texas at Austin: Mexican American and Latina/o Studies, African and African Diaspora Studies, American Studies, and Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies. Together, these departments encompassed 62 professors, six undergraduate majors, four graduate programs, and eight minors and certificates.

Kepner’s reporting is especially important because it documents the hugely successful People's Hearing on Threats to Diversity and Academic Freedom reminding us of what can easily be obscured by the bureaucratic language of “consolidation.” These departments did not simply appear on an organizational chart. They grew out of decades of student activism, community struggle, intellectual labor, institution-building, and demands that the university recognize histories and bodies of knowledge long excluded from the academy. As students returned to campus this fall, however, those independent departments ceased to exist, folded into the new Department of Social and Cultural Analysis.

That should concern all of us who care about academic freedom, intellectual diversity, shared governance, and the public mission of the university. Kepner’s piece helps us understand not only what UT has dismantled, but what generations of students, faculty, and community members had fought so hard to build.

-Angela Valenzuela

Stories behind UT’s now-closed ethnic and gender studies departments
By Lily Kepner,Staff WriterAug 24, 2026


Recent University of Texas graduate Dezaree Walker speaks on the second panel of invited speakers at the People’s Hearing on Threats to Diversity and Academic Freedom in Higher Education, a hearing organized by activists for the Texas Legislative Progressive Caucus to hear from students and educators about policies impacting higher education at the Robert E. Johnson Conference Center in Austin, Aug. 12, 2026.Sara Diggins/Austin American-Statesman

As Longhorns return to campus Monday, decades-old ethnic and gender studies departments will no longer exist.

Six months ago, University of Texas President Jim Davis announced that the university would consolidate ethnic and gender studies programs in the College of Liberal Arts into the new Department of Social and Cultural Analysis. This summer, the department names were scraped from their glass doors, chairs lost their titles and supporting staff were relocated or let go.



University of Texas professor of educational leadership and policy Angela Valenzuela listens to the first panel of speakers at the People’s Hearing on Threats to Diversity and Academic Freedom in Higher Education, a hearing organized by activists for the Texas Legislative Progressive Caucus to hear from students and educators about policies impacting higher education at the Robert E. Johnson Conference Center in Austin, Aug. 12, 2026.

The consolidation angered some faculty and students who believe the shift ignores the decades-long history of the departments and the value they offer students and the city of Austin. Faculty fear it will make it harder to hire, limit courses and resources and restrain the fields of study.

The four closed departments — Mexican American and Latina/o Studies; African and African Diaspora Studies; Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies; and American Studies — encompassed 62 professors, six majors, four graduate programs, and eight minors and certificates. Last year, the departments had a combined 307 students enrolled in undergraduate majors, according to UT data. Dozens more pursued minor, graduate and doctoral programs, according to records used by the consolidation committee.

Davis has said the university is not cutting faculty or resources as part of the consolidation. But he recently announced sweeping changes to strictly define the core curriculum that all UT students have to take. Previously, courses in the closed departments counted toward the core, but under Davis’s changes, social and cultural analysis offerings may no longer be eligible, limiting student enrollment.

The core curriculum changes and the consolidation could affect the future of gender and ethnic studies as the university invests in fields favored by conservatives.

The American-Statesman spent the last several months talking to the consolidated departments’ founders, faculty and students to understand the role they had in teaching and producing knowledge in the state. What emerged was the story of four departments born out of successful student activism and distinguished by a connection to the local community, small class sizes and interdisciplinary work and research.



Martha Cotera, a founder of UT Center For Mexican American Studies, at her home in Austin on Tuesday, March 24, 2026. Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman

Mexican American and Latina/o Studies

During UT’s spring break, Martha Cotera, 88, stacked nonperishable food and old books in a bin by her front door for UT’s Mexican American and Latina/o Studies Department.

She would take those donations to the department’s food pantry at its UT home in the Gordon White Building. There, the department housed a library, research institute and center that worked with community activists like Cotera to study pressing problems affecting the Chicano community in Austin, from a lack of healthcare options to affordability.

Cotera began advocating for the department as an activist and Texas librarian in the 1960s. There hasn’t been a month in the nearly six decades since when she’s lost touch with the field’s advocates on campus.

It grew from an idea that student advocates had in 1968 to become a department, research institute and center offering graduate and undergraduate degrees with 14 professors on staff. As UT folds it into a larger academic unit, Cotera fears all those resources could be at risk.

In the 1960s, without a dedicated center, department or faculty to study Mexican-American life, Latinos were only spoken about at UT in relation to folklore, Cotera said. The history of Mexicans and Latinos was excluded from other fields like history, education and sociology. The lack of research and education affected Mexican Americans in Austin who didn’t have access to in-depth information about the policies and biases that affected their lives, Cotera said.

“We were always going to be stuck in that corner,” Cotera said. “It was very important that we get out of the folklore realm into multi-disciplinary studies in a serious way by looking at our community, by doing research in our community.”

Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, white Texans made up the majority of students at UT. When more Mexican American and Black students enrolled, student activists began pushing for classes and research that reflected their experiences.

In the late 1960s, UT responded by creating an ethnic studies program. By 1970, the university launched centers dedicated to Mexican American Studies and African American Studies.insert Diosa

The Mexican American Studies center had an impact across the university. After the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action at UT in 1996, David Montejano, the center’s former director, advocated for a race-neutral approach to improving student diversity. He and other center faculty met with state senators. Their efforts were key in drafting the top 10% rule, which gave all Texas high schoolers in the top 10% of their class admission to any state university.


Cotera served on the center’s board, which invested in researching Latino communities in Austin, developing a research archive in the Benson Latin American Collection at UT libraries, an archive of Mexican veterans and an annual conference for Latino scholars. Even as research from center-affiliated faculty grew, advocates continued to push for a department, which would allow the university to hire full-time professors and dedicate more funding.

In 2014, Cotera got her wish, and UT launched the Mexican American and Latino/a Studies Department. The new status allowed program offerings to grow with an undergraduate major and doctoral program.

Paul Del Bosque, 44, recalls hearing about the center’s legacy before he joined the department as a student.
“As a child, I remember hearing about the legendary faculty and the scholarship that was coming out of Chicano studies at UT,” said Del Bosque, who later pursued his master’s and doctoral degrees in the department.


Now in his fifth year of his doctorate program, he researches how hurricanes impact high-poverty communities in South Texas and on the border, contributing Texas-focused scholarship to a Latino community. When he finishes his dissertation in 2028, he plans to pursue a tenure-track job teaching Texas history or environmental humanities.

Reflecting on her beloved department closing, Cotera wiped away tears as she thought about students and the ongoing research into policing, the border and history that could be at risk without UT resources.

“It doesn’t make sense,” she said.

Two days after the consolidation was announced, the
Civitas Institute, UT’s conservative think tank created by the Texas Legislature in 2021, hosted a symposium titled “America’s Latino Future.” UT’s Mexican American and Latino/a Studies Department, located across the street from where the institute is housed, was not invited to participate, its former chair confirmed.

Cotera attended the event and listened as researchers discussed the economic importance of Latinos and the need for more research into Latino communities.

“I said ‘Thank you very much, you made the case,’” she said.
=
Ever since the department changes were announced, community activists have gathered at Cotera’s house to discuss how to preserve Mexican American history and education in Austin and fight the administration’s “erasure” of the field at UT.


The founders of the Mexican American center have stayed together in an informal coalition for the past five decades to ensure it remains funded and supported by UT and to help students find internships and housing, Cotera said. That work will continue.

“This is a grassroots effort. Cut it off at the top,” Cotera said. “The roots will remain.”
Attendees listen at the People’s Hearing on Threats to Diversity and Academic Freedom in Higher Education, a hearing organized by activists for the Texas Legislative Progressive Caucus to hear from students and educators about policies impacting higher education at the Robert E. Johnson Conference Center in Austin, Aug. 12, 2026.Sara Diggins/Austin American-Statesman

UT’s African and African Diaspora Studies Department was the largest Black studies department in the nation.

With 26 faculty, an institute for urban policy research and analysis, a research center, a doctoral program, two majors and art galleries, the department was a national leader.

When it became a department in 2010, it was part of then-President William C. Power’s vision to expand education about diverse topics across campus, grow its enrollment of nonwhite students, meet community demand and elevate the national prominence of the university, said Cherise Smith, a former department chair.

The faculty were successful in living up to that vision: The department is known across the country and world, attracting international students and serving as a model for Stanford University when it built its own department, Smith said. UT’s faculty researched education and the relationship between slavery and capitalism while having a special focus on African American art and performance.

For 50 years the field has grown and blossomed at UT, attracting students who also study fashion, natural sciences, engineering, business and education, Smith said.

“There was always an assumption that we would be training all of the students who came to UT,” Smith said. “Not a particular racial or ethnic group.”

It took a while to get to that point. After a UT student petition advocating for classes that reflected the Black experience attracted more than 1,300 signatures, the first class in Black history was offered in 1968, according to Texas archives. The university launched an ethnic studies program the following year.

In 1970, the university opened the center now known as the John L. Warfield Center for African and African American Studies, which pioneered research and new academic avenues for students. In response to student advocacy in 2002, UT began offering a certificate in Yoruba Studies, an indigenous African language that students feared would go extinct without continued education and preservation.

The local community has been central to the center’s mission. Faculty researched why Black Austinites were leaving the city and the impact of historic segregation in Austin, Smith said. They also created public resources like a KUT podcast called “Black Austin Matters” that highlights prominent community members, including Talib Abdullahi, the founder of Black History Bike Ride, and Chi Ndika, founder of Luv Fats Ice Cream.

Faculty have also studied how African heritage intersects with a variety of fields, from art — a particular strength of the department — to sports, incarceration and queer communities and share their results in community talks open to all through the Warfield Center.

“I don’t just research out of intellectual curiosity, I research to change the world,” said Ashanté Reese, a professor of anthropology in the department.

Classes are grounded in faculty expertise and contemporary subjects, such as a course on power and money in U.S. education policy taught by Kevin Foster, a professor who serves as a trustee for the Austin Independent School District.

Though the courses, programs and degrees will remain in the new social analysis department, the decision to consolidate without consulting professors felt like an effort to control “whose history gets told, and how and when,” not an honest reevaluation of resources, Reese said.

“We might be a different name. We might need to reimagine and dream,” Reese said. But it will continue, she said. “Black Studies was never about institutional recognition.”

American Studies




University of Texas Professor Lauren Gutterman, the former chair of UT's American Studies Department, smiles as she greets fellow educators at the People’s Hearing on Threats to Diversity and Academic Freedom in Higher Education, a hearing organized by activists for the Texas Legislative Progressive Caucus to hear from students and educators about policies impacting higher education at the Robert E. Johnson Conference Center in Austin, Aug. 12, 2026.Sara Diggins/Austin American-Statesman

UT has offered American Studies courses since 1941, when a founding scholar of the field began teaching at the Forty Acres, said Lauren Gutterman, the former department chair. The field focuses on “cultural, social and intellectual life” in the U.S. through a variety of lenses, including economic, political, historical and environmental research.

American Studies has operated as its own department at UT since 1998, also supporting an Urban Studies major, in which students study the history and creation of urban life. UT’s department — one of 150 in the nation and 28 that offer a doctoral program — is known for having UT’s first Pulitzer Prize-winning history faculty member in 1967.

There were more than 130 undergraduate students and 30 doctoral students in American Studies at UT last spring, Gutterman said. Students take classes on American sports and culture, North American borders, the history of religion and digital cultures.

“What students find in American Studies is an opportunity to think about what the United States is, what it means to be a part of this nation, who we’re taught belongs here, who we’re taught does not belong,” Gutterman said.

Opponents have found flaws with the field for being overly critical of the country. Though not addressing the department by name, UT Provost William Inboden wrote in a 2025 National Affairs essay that American history courses offer an “imbalanced” view of the U.S.

Gutterman said, however, that American Studies serves a crucial role, allowing students to explore any aspect of American history, culture and politics through a wide range of methodologies, from mapping to digital archives.

“Critical engagement with American history and culture actually helps students to become better citizens,” Gutterman said. “You (learn about) contemporary issues that are happening and to take action about the issues.”

Alumni include Pulitzer Prize winner and book critic Gail Caldwell and former Austin Mayor Pro Tem Kathy Tovo, as well as doctors, attorneys, professors and college presidents like Laura Cawley, who leads Bethany College, a liberal arts school in Kansas. Both honors programs in the College of Liberal Arts are led by American Studies professors.
Iván Chaar López, a University of Texas scholar on border surveillance, in his office in Austin, Wednesday, July 15, 2026. Amid concerns UT is quieting controversial fields, Chaar López fears the president violated his academic freedom in denying him tenure.Mikala Compton/Austin American-Statesman.

Still, as UT reorganizes its core curriculum requirements and pours resources into Western civilization and civic education, department officials say American Studies is being sidelined. The department is already bracing to lose faculty in the coming year.

American Studies professor Iván Chaar López, whose research is critical of U.S. border surveillance, was denied tenure by a presidential committee last year without an explanation. Because of an up-or-out policy that forces professors denied tenure to leave UT, he will depart the Forty Acres in 2027.

No other professor in the four consolidated departments was up for tenure last year, but the denial made Gutterman fearful that the university is overlooking the merits of her field.

This year, faculty will continue teaching courses like Oceanic Histories, Jews of the U.S., Canada and Latin America, Urban Unrest and Asian Americans in the South, she said.

“Even if our department is closed by the university, American Studies as a field, our research, our teaching and the intellectual, personal community that we have built is not going away,” Gutterman said.

Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies


Rep. Lulu Flores, D-Austin, asks questions of the first panel of invited speakers the People’s Hearing on Threats to Diversity and Academic Freedom in Higher Education, a hearing organized by activists for the Texas Legislative Progressive Caucus to hear from students and educators about policies impacting higher education at the Robert E. Johnson Conference Center in Austin, Aug. 12, 2026.Sara Diggins/Austin American-Statesman

The newest department of the four consolidated, the Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies Department, formed in 2023 after operating as a center since 1979. Its near 50-year history began with students pushing for an education that included all people.

In more than a dozen interviews with alumni, current students, professors and recent staff hires, the women’s and gender studies community defended the program as far-reaching and skills-based, leading students to meaningful careers and lives.

Faculty and courses have focused on preserving untold history and examining how key issues from health to literature and information studies affect people differently based on sexuality, race, disability and gender.

“Gender studies, ethnic studies are actual disciplines born out of the need that wasn’t necessarily being met,” said Nicole Ramsey, a women’s and gender studies professor. “If you are to have knowledge about the world, it doesn’t make sense to only do that through certain frameworks that don’t include everybody. It could just never work.”

Alumni — including a nonprofit founder, therapist, professor and a Rhodes Scholar — said their courses helped them empathetically engage with people with different opinions and personal backgrounds. Department courses on women’s reproductive health, LGBTQ history and literature written by women gave them critical thinking skills and new perspectives that shaped their careers.

“It feels like it’s radical knowledge,” said Neha Yawalkar, who graduated from UT in 2025 with a women’s and gender studies minor.

Yawalkar said her minor taught her how gender affects marketing, engineering and healthcare. A fertility and reproduction course helped her see how she could pursue her passions through healthcare while her South Asian migration course taught her to “critique and read with nuance.” An LGBTQ course showed her how queer people historically struggled to find inclusive care.


University of Texas Women’s Gender and Sexuality Studies coordinator Jackie Salcedo, left, department manager Grayson Hunt, freshman student Sofia Gomez and director Lisa Moore in Burdine Hall, Feb. 18, 2026 after UT President Jim Davis announced plans to consolidate ethnic and gender studies into a new department.Sara Diggins/Austin American-Statesman

Isaac James, who graduated in 2022 with a minor in LGBTQ studies and major in government, said the program showed him how he could serve his community beyond politics and taught him about the rights queer people have fought for. He cofounded OutVote in 2024, an organization focused on engaging LGBTQ youth in politics, after seeing his peers feel unrepresented in government.

“I really do think without LGBTQ studies, I would not have been able to obtain the same professional and academic success,” said James, who became a Rhodes Scholar at the University of Oxford after graduation.

Becoming a department gave women’s and gender studies the ability to hire full-time faculty, a chair to speak directly to the dean of the College of Liberal Arts and more money for events, marketing and staff. But three years after the department’s founding, Davis’ consolidation announcement eliminated the department’s standalone status as conservative state lawmakers exerted pressure on university leaders to tamp down on courses focused on gender or LGBTQ topics.

Lisa Moore, a former chair of the department, began her career at UT in the 1990s as an English and women’s and gender studies professor. She fears she will end it labeled as a professor of “social and cultural analysis” — a field she doesn’t think has merit outside of UT.

Moore said Davis has not responded to her messages inviting the UT president to her classes or to meet with her about the department. She knows that the field she’s spent more than 30 years studying has “already transformed” the country’s understanding of itself.

“What happens in our classrooms is something that I would love our harshest critics to be able to witness,” Moore said.


Lily Kepner
Higher Education Reporter

Lily Kepner started at the American-Statesman in October 2023. She has appeared on BBC, NPR and Texas Standard to talk about her coverage, which has spanned the impact of state laws and politics on the University of Texas, pro-Palestinian protests, free speech, the anti-DEI ban, LGBTQ student belonging and more. Kepner graduated with honors from Boston University's College of Communication in 2023, where she received the college's highest awards for writing and journalism leadership and led the award-winning student newspaper as Editor-in-Chief. In her time with the American-Statesman, she contributed to reporting that won an Edward R Murrow Award for breaking news, won the School Bell Award for Outstanding Feature from Texas State Teachers Association, and Critics Choice for Best of Austin in the Austin Chronicle. Previously, she has been published in USA Today, The Boston Globe, The National Catholic Reporter and GBH. Kepner is passionate about accountability and service journalism and encourages anyone to reach out to her to tell their story or share a tip.

Tuesday, July 21, 2026

Texas border surveillance scholar exceeded tenure standards. UT's president denied him. By Lily Kepner, Austin American-Statesman, July 20, 2026

Friends:

What has happened to Professor Iván Chaar López at the University of Texas at Austin is profoundly unjust—and should alarm everyone who cares about academic freedom, fairness, and the integrity of our public universities.

By every meaningful measure, Professor Chaar López earned tenure. External experts unanimously endorsed his scholarship. His department unanimously recommended him. The college voted overwhelmingly in his favor. His dean concluded that he exceeded UT’s demanding standards in scholarship, teaching, mentoring, and service. Yet an unidentified tenure committee overturned this extensive faculty-led review without providing any explanation.

This is so incredibly disrespectful of Dr. López, a leading scholar in his field.

When the evidence of merit is this overwhelming and university leaders refuse to explain their decision, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that political ideology—not academic excellence—was at play.

Professor Chaar López studies border surveillance, race, colonialism, technology, and state power. These are precisely the difficult and consequential subjects that tenure exists to protect. Scholars must be free to ask questions that unsettle those in power. Punishing them because their research is politically inconvenient is not academic leadership. It is censorship.

This decision also disregards faculty expertise, undermines shared governance, and denies Professor Chaar López meaningful transparency and due process. It sends a chilling message across the university: even extraordinary scholarship, teaching, mentoring, and service may not protect a faculty member whose research conflicts with the ideological preferences of political or institutional leaders.

UT should reverse this decision, grant Professor Chaar López tenure, and explain publicly how such a grave miscarriage of academic judgment was allowed to occur.

This is not only about one professor. It is about whether merit, truth-seeking, and academic freedom still matter at our state’s flagship public university.

—Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.


By Lily Kepner, Staff Writer, Austin American-Statesman

July 20, 2026

Iván Chaar López, a University of Texas scholar on border surveillance, in his office in Austin, Wednesday, July 15, 2026. Amid concerns UT is quieting controversial fields, Chaar López fears the president violated his academic freedom in denying him tenure.Mikala Compton/Austin American-Statesman

By all performance measures, professor Iván Chaar López was a shoo-in for tenure at the University of Texas.

Tenure, a coveted status that protects professors' jobs so they can research freely without fear of retaliation, is only considered after faculty complete about six years of research, teaching, mentoring and service to a university.

The bar to achieve tenure is set intentionally high — professors must pass a year-long review led by faculty experts, who independently assess each professor’s work.


Chaar López, who investigates how border surveillance technologies are tied to history and race, was praised by the College of Liberal Arts dean, his colleagues in UT’s American Studies department and external reviewers from universities across the nation. When he went through tenure review last year, they said he exceeded the high bar for tenure and produced foundational work in his field, according to records obtained by the Statesman.

More than 30 scholars recommended him for tenure throughout the process, pending approval by UT President Jim Davis, a presidential committee and the UT System Board of Regents.

But in February, Davis’ tenure committee — whose members are not publicly listed — unexpectedly denied Chaar López’s application. When asked for clarification, Davis and the committee declined to give Chaar López a reason or change the decision.

Because of an “up-or-out” policy at UT with tenure-track professors, Chaar López must leave UT at the end of this school year, leaving him to restart his tenure journey somewhere else. It could take several more years to get to the same place at a different school.

The tenure denial bewildered the professor and colleagues who had touted his success in the field.

Chaar López said he fears the university decided not to give him tenure because of his area of study, which may be controversial among Texas conservatives. He is a professor in American Studies, a department that is being consolidated into a new Department of Cultural and Social Analysis, and his work is critical of border enforcement, colonialism and government surveillance.

Five scholars with expertise in tenure interviewed by the American-Statesman said it is very rare and unusual for a president to deny tenure applications after near-unanimous positive assessments. UT System’s own policy and the Texas Education Code give deference to these independent assessments in tenure decisions.

UT denied a request for an interview with Davis and did not answer questions about why Chaar López was denied tenure.

The decision comes as UT grapples with its identity under new leadership and faces pressure to limit instruction of “controversial topics.”

For a president to deny tenure without a stated reason is against common practices and “opens the gate to political interference in a way that is unprecedented in the last century,” said William Tierney, a professor of higher education at the University of Southern California.

Davis is not an academic; his background is as a lawyer. He was granted tenure by the Board of Regents as part of his employment contract despite never holding a teaching position at a university.

As Davis and UT Provost William Inboden have emphasized a commitment to academic excellence and balance in the past year, they have removed top leaders over differences in vision, evaded transparency about controversial decisions and eliminated procedures that would have guaranteed Chaar López an independent review to determine whether the university violated his academic freedom.

“Iván’s case is a warning for all faculty across the university,” said Lauren Gutterman, former chair of the American Studies department. “Because it suggests that achieving excellence in your field is no longer enough to secure tenure and promotion.”

What is the tenure process?


Iván Chaar López, a University of Texas scholar on border surveillance, in his office in Austin, Wednesday, July 15, 2026. Amid concerns UT is quieting controversial fields, Chaar López fears the president violated his academic freedom in denying him tenure.Mikala Compton/Austin American-Statesman

Tenure is historically tied to academic freedom, or a professor’s ability to study a subject without interference. But functionally, it’s a job protection that has incentivized talented faculty to come to U.S. universities since the early 1900s, pitched as a way for the most talented professors to freely pursue knowledge without retaliation when the answers they find are unpopular to those paying their salaries.

Texas Republicans have openly criticized tenure in recent years, framing the job protection as a way professors can stick around without having to prove their worth. They argue it makes it easier for academics to inject their beliefs into teaching, leading to liberal indoctrination.

But experts say that argument lacks an understanding of the intense tenure review process, where faculty sometimes spend more than a decade curating research and typically six years under probation. Universities only grant tenure if professors can prove their intellectual merit and expertise to scholars within the field nationwide, the professor’s own department and their college.

The American Association of University Professors, a national organization representing university employees, estimates that the percentage of university faculty holding full-time tenured positions decreased from 39% in 1987 to 24% in 2021.

Though denials of tenure happen, it is rare for them to occur at the presidential level, because typically, a chair or dean would flag missing requirements or concerns about scholarship in advance, said Willis Jones, an associate dean in education at Southern Methodist University who oversees tenure cases.

The Texas Legislature recently expanded the ways a tenured professor can be fired, and some states have banned the status entirely for new hires. Without tenure, professors are less free to pursue controversial research questions, because they can be dismissed without the same due process if those in power opposed to their findings demand punishment, said Barrett Taylor, a University of North Texas researcher and co-author of a forthcoming book on conservative attacks on tenure.

“Most people probably don’t want the powerful to decide what gets taught,” but weakening tenure makes that more likely, Taylor said.

UT System policy states faculty expertise should be given “utmost” consideration in tenure awards. Tenure candidates must demonstrate excellence in research, teaching, service and mentoring, according to the policy. All but two of 32 reviewers determined Chaar López met all those standards.

'Exceeds our demanding standards'


An award for excellence in mentoring is displayed in Iván Chaar López’s office at the University of Texas in Austin, Wednesday, July 15, 2026. Amid concerns UT is quieting controversial fields, Chaar López fears the president violated his academic freedom in denying him tenure.Mikala Compton/Austin American-Statesman


Chaar López grew up in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Fascinated by borders and how they are maintained, defined and policed, he earned his doctorate in American Culture from the University of Michigan. He’s been preparing for tenure since 2015, hoping that securing employment protection would allow him to study more ambitious questions, he said.

In 2020, the University of Texas hired him as a tenure-track assistant professor, giving him six years to prove his scholarship and commitment to UT before being formally evaluated. During his six years at UT, he published a book, won four fellowships or grants and wrote seven peer-reviewed articles or book chapters.

After the pandemic, he started working with professors across UT, helping to connect the American Studies department with other fields across the College of Liberal Arts. He brought his Border Technologies Lab, created in 2018 at Cornell University, to UT. The lab employs undergraduate and graduate students to research everything from artificial intelligence to drone technology at the border.

Last spring, he began the tenure review process, submitting his five strongest pieces of published research. Eight professors from his field at schools across the U.S. and Canada — including a MacArthur Genius Grant recipient — said he met or exceeded the bar for tenure. In September, they unanimously recommended him for approval.

After reviewing his work, teaching evaluations, a research statement and service statement, a committee of seven UT American Studies professors also recommended him for tenure unanimously that fall. Gutterman concurred. A committee in the college voted 19-2 to grant him tenure with the two dissenters voicing some concerns about the “critical severity of elements of his work,” according to the tenure evaluation from Interim Dean David Sosa.

But Sosa concluded that “even if one harbors reservations about the ultimate defensibility of some of Chaar López’s scholarly contributions, there is no denying that he is by the standards of the areas in which he works a distinguished figure,” and that his arguments are worthy of debate.

Sosa wrote in an email to the Davis’ tenure committee that he believed Chaar López “exceeds our demanding standards of scholarship, teaching, mentoring, and service.” Sosa described the professor as a leading scholar who advances “foundational debates” in multiple fields and reflects a “moving” commitment to the field.

In February, a committee overseen by Davis, whose members are not public, denied the application. When Sosa called Gutterman to tell him, she was shocked. When she and Chaar López asked Sosa for a reason, the liberal arts dean said he didn’t know why.

Can the president deny tenure?

Five tenure experts said it is rare for a president’s decision to conflict with the official recommendations of tenure reviewers, who are trained to evaluate the merit of a peer’s case.

It’s even more rare for a president to deny tenure without explaining the decision, said Michael DeCesare, senior program officer in the Department of Academic Freedom, Tenure and Governance at the American Association of University Professors.

Typically, if there is a problem, the president would go back to the dean or professor seeking tenure and ask for clarification or defer to other university processes to investigate the discrepancy. In an “extraordinary” case where a president does deny tenure, there would be back-and-forth discussions with the administrator and faculty experts to discuss concerns, DeCesare said.

“When no reason is given, any reason is possible, and that’s our concern,” DeCesare said.

UT’s policy states the tenure appointment “must be in the best interest” of the university — a phrase that gives administrators broad discretion.

Deepa Das Acevedo, a legal labor scholar and author of “The War on Tenure,” said that although a presidential veto is rare in tenure proceedings, it is not illegal.

“Universities, like most employers in most contexts, are entitled to make decisions about what they want to focus on and where they want to direct their resources,” she said.

Days after Chaar López received the decision, UT regents limited how professors can address controversial topics without defining what “controversial topics” means. A week before that, Davis announced that the American Studies department would be folded in with gender and ethnic studies departments into a new Department of Social and Cultural Analysis.

'We’re trying to get at what is the truth'


Iván Chaar López, a University of Texas scholar on border surveillance, in his office in Austin, Wednesday, July 15, 2026. Amid concerns UT is quieting controversial fields, Chaar López fears the president violated his academic freedom in denying him tenure.Mikala Compton/Austin American-Statesman

National educational groups, including the AAUP, and colleagues privately wrote letters urging Davis to reconsider his decision.

Previously, Chaar López could have appealed the decision through the Faculty Council’s academic freedom committee, which was comprised of seven elected members. But after the UT System eliminated faculty councils in compliance with a new state law, Chaar López’s only recourse was the faculty committees appointed by Davis.

Chaar López submitted an appeal to the president’s procedural review committee, which denied his claim, and submitted final arguments to Davis. Both were denied, according to an email from Sosa.

When Chaar López received the denials, he felt every emotion. He had built a community at UT, relationships with students and colleagues. His peers had validated his work.

The rejection felt heavy and unjust, he said, as did the university’s glib denial, delivered in a short email from his college dean.

“I’ve done so much for its students, for its community, and there’s no recognition of that at all,” he said.

Chaar López is now pursuing a formal grievance arguing that Davis violated his academic freedom. His complaint will be heard by a panel of faculty appointed by Davis and UT’s chief academic officer.

Though he is not sure exactly what’s next, Chaar López is determined to stay in academia and continue his work researching how race, history and technology shape the government’s immigration enforcement at the border.

“I ask questions that maybe someone in a position of power might disagree with. … We ask these questions because we’re trying to get at what is the truth,” Chaar López said. “I did all of that work — 11 years of work — trying to achieve the security of tenure so that I can maybe ask even more difficult questions.”

July 20, 2026


Lily Kepner
HIGHER EDUCATION REPORTER


Lily Kepner started at the American-Statesman in October 2023. She has appeared on BBC, NPR and Texas Standard to talk about her coverage, which has spanned the impact of state laws and politics on the University of Texas, pro-Palestinian protests, free speech, the anti-DEI ban, LGBTQ student belonging and more. Kepner graduated with honors from Boston University's College of Communication in 2023, where she received the college's highest awards for writing and journalism leadership and led the award-winning student newspaper as Editor-in-Chief. In her time with the American-Statesman, she contributed to reporting that won an Edward R Murrow Award for breaking news, won the School Bell Award for Outstanding Feature from Texas State Teachers Association, and Critics Choice for Best of Austin in the Austin Chronicle. Previously, she has been published in USA Today, The Boston Globe, The National Catholic Reporter and GBH. Kepner is passionate about accountability and service journalism and encourages anyone to reach out to her to tell their story or share a tip.

Monday, July 13, 2026

UT is merging four ethnic and gender studies departments. What changes this fall, by Lily Kepner, July 10, 2026

Friends, 

I invite you to read Lily Kepner’s important reporting on the uncertain future of the University of Texas at Austin’s newly created Department of Social and Cultural Analysis. Her article makes clear that the consolidation of Mexican American and Latina/o Studies, African and African Diaspora Studies, American Studies, and Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies is not simply an administrative reorganization. It entails the loss of departmental names, leadership positions, staff jobs, institutional homes, and scholarly identities built over decades.

At the same time, the appointment of Dr. Danielle Clealand as interim chair offers some reassurance that the new department will be led by a respected scholar who understands these fields and has the trust of many colleagues. Faculty are clearly determined to protect their students, programs, intellectual traditions, and hard-won legacies. 

Still, the unanswered questions remain profound: Will the new department receive the resources, autonomy, and institutional respect it needs to thrive—or is this only the first stage of further erosion?

Kepner’s article captures both the grief of what is being lost and the resolve of faculty to carry this essential work forward. 

-Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

Six weeks before the University of Texas begins its fall semester, its new Department of Social and Cultural Analysis still lacks a permanent home and a clear identity.

By ,Staff Writer

Murals decorate the University of Texas Women’s Gender and Sexuality Studies office in Burdine Hall, Feb. 18, 2026. UT President Jim Davis announced plans this year to consolidate ethnic and gender studies into a new department and review the courses and majors within it, but the future of the new department is still unclear.

Sara Diggins/Austin American-Statesman
Six weeks before the University of Texas begins its fall semester, its new Department of Social and Cultural Analysis still lacks both a permanent home and a clear identity.

As Texas universities face growing political pressure over identity-based academic programs, UT President Jim Davis announced in February that the university’s four ethnic and women gender and sexuality studies departments would be consolidated into a new Department of Social and Cultural Analysis.

Offering the clearest picture yet of the department's future, College of Liberal Arts Interim Dean David Sosa on July 1 appointed Danielle Clealand, an associate professor in the Mexican American and Latina/o Studies department, as interim chair of the new department .

At the end of the academic year, the four department chairs learned they will lose their appointments in August, a new department manager was hired and the departments’ names were removed from the doors, the former chairs said.

Between the two new departments, which also include European and Eurasian studies, five staff members lost their jobs, and others were reassigned, Clealand confirmed. She said they were committed to finding new positions for the staff.

The new department and its website launch Aug. 15, when the departments of Mexican American and Latina/o Studies, African and African Diaspora Studies, American Studies and Women and Gender Studies will close, Clealand said. But many questions remain.

After her first week as interim chair, Clealand, speaking to the American-Statesman as an individual, said she doesn't expect a Social and Cultural Analysis major to launch by the fall. She also said the new department has not yet been assigned a home, as the four former departments were spread across two buildings.

Although her focus going into the role is to unite the four departments in a collective vision, “I don't know if we have a unifying message yet,” Clealand said in an interview after her appointment. “Perhaps we'll get there. But I think for now we want students to know that yes, this is one large department, but within that department you can still take all of the same classes and majors that you could before.”

Clealand’s appointment eased faculty's fears that the consolidation would weaken the decades-old departments, which collectively offer six undergraduate majors, four graduate programs, six minors and three doctorate programs, said Karma Chavez, the chair of Mexican American and Latino/a studies.

“I think everyone in the four units realizes that we lost our battle, and that our objective now is to focus on building the best new department collectively and collaboratively that we possibly can,” Chavez said, adding that Clealand is “the right leader for this time.”

“The biggest question that all of us have is whether we're going to be treated like a normal department,” Chavez said, or if “another shoe will drop.”

Cherise Smith, the department chair of African and African Diaspora studies said she is "cautiously excited” about coming together with different intellectual groups and working with more students.

Smith said defining the department’s mission is complicated because social and cultural analysis is not a commonly established academic discipline.

“It’s destabilizing for all of us,” she said. “Many of us are wondering whether we can be a unified department.”

What will and won’t change this fall

Clealand said she accepted the interim chair position because she had earned the trust of colleagues in her home department and in African and African Diaspora studies, where she had often collaborated. She also held a leadership position in Mexican American and Latino studies.

Her hope for the new department, she said, is “longevity.”

Clealand said enrollment declined in ethnic and gender studies after UT eliminated the signature-course program that allowed students to satisfy core curriculum requirements through many of the departments’ classes.

Now, Clealand said she wants to encourage prospective students and faculty to see the new department’s potential despite frustration over the consolidation, which she said a majority of faculty opposed.

Having worked across two departments, Clealand said she’s seen the benefits of collaboration and hopes the consolidation will ultimately strengthen those connections.

“I think that right now people don't necessarily know what we're doing, and recruiting can be challenging because of that,” Clealand said. “But I'm hoping that we can establish ourselves as a really strong department, not only institutionally but nationally.”

Sosa, the College of Liberal Arts interim dean, said the college will begin reviewing the new department’s curriculum and degree programs during the next academic year. For now, Clealand said, all existing degree programs will continue enrolling students and offering the same curriculum.

Now, Clealand said she wants to encourage prospective students and faculty to see the new department’s potential despite frustration over the consolidation, which she said a majority of faculty opposed.

Having worked across two departments, Clealand said she’s seen the benefits of collaboration and hopes the consolidation will ultimately strengthen those connections.

“I think that right now people don't necessarily know what we're doing, and recruiting can be challenging because of that,” Clealand said. “But I'm hoping that we can establish ourselves as a really strong department, not only institutionally but nationally.”

Sosa, the College of Liberal Arts interim dean, said the college will begin reviewing the new department’s curriculum and degree programs during the next academic year. For now, Clealand said, all existing degree programs will continue enrolling students and offering the same curriculum.

‘This existential crisis’

In mid-August, professors will become “professors of social and cultural analysis,” a new department website will launch, and the four original departments will shutter.

For the former chairs, the changes amount to the loss of departments they spent their careers building.

Lisa Moore, who has taught at UT since 1991 and chairs Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies, worries the new department will render her life work “invisible.”

“It's heartbreaking, and I do find myself kind of grief about it catching me,” she said. “It feels like just a really brutal loss of my scholarly and professional identity, and an erasure of the decades of my career that I know I've spent building this field.”

When Smith became chair, university leaders envisioned African and African Diaspora studies as a program that could touch every student through the core curriculum, she said.

The department eventually grew to 26 faculty members — the largest of its kind in the nation — attracting students from around the world. Although the department itself is disappearing, Smith said its legacy doesn’t have to.

“These challenges, this existential crisis, has made us recommit to and refocused on what we do,” Smith said. “ We're going to exist in a different way from here on out, but there are things that we will continue to do and that we need to continue to do intellectually and training our students, for example, that we don't need to have a department named African and African Diaspora Studies to do.”

Thursday, July 09, 2026

Academic Freedom in Texas Higher Education is also a Latino Struggle, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D. July 9, 2026

Academic Freedom in Texas Higher Education is also a Latino Struggle

by 

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D. 

July 9, 2026

I am grateful to see attention given to this important lawsuit challenging censorship in the Texas Tech University System. I also want to thank Lily Kepner for her tireless coverage of Texas education politics. My concern here is not with the messenger—far from it. We need more journalists willing to cover these consequential struggles with care and persistence. May her kind multiply.

My concern is that the issues named here—academic freedom, faculty governance, classroom censorship, LGBTQ+ rights, and the teaching of race, gender, and inequality—are urgent and consequential not only for Texas Tech, but for all of higher education in Texas.

That said, I want to gently but critically note an omission that matters. Latino communities, scholars, students, and organizations have been deeply and tirelessly involved in these very struggles across Texas—shoulder-to-shoulder with Black communities, LGBTQ+ communities, faculty organizations, civil rights groups, students, and other allies. These fights are not new to us. They are the same fights over curriculum, representation, Ethnic Studies, DEI, academic freedom, and the right of students to receive a truthful and complete education.

Indeed, many of us have researched, documented, testified, organized, and published on these issues for years, including the harms produced by SB 17, attacks on DEI, the chilling of race- and gender-conscious scholarship, and the broader dismantling of democratic governance in Texas higher education. Latina/o students and faculty are not peripheral to this story. 

We are central to so much of it.

That is why it is disappointing to see the article frame the issue almost exclusively through Black communities and Black professors, without also naming the Latino communities and scholars who are likewise targeted by these policies and who have been in the struggle from the beginning. In Texas, this omission is especially consequential. 

Latina/o students make up a major share of the state’s public higher education population. Many of the programs, courses, histories, and pedagogies now under threat—Mexican American Studies, Latina/o Studies, Ethnic Studies, bilingual education, immigration studies, borderlands history, and critical policy research—speak directly to our communities’ lives and futures.

This is not a call to diminish the anti-Blackness at work in these attacks. Quite the opposite. Anti-Black racism must be named clearly and confronted directly. But in Texas, anti-Blackness, anti-Latino racism, anti-immigrant politics, anti-LGBTQ+ attacks, and hostility toward gender justice are intertwined in the same authoritarian project. The struggle for academic freedom is strongest when we name all of the communities whose knowledge, histories, and presence are being targeted.

So yes, this lawsuit matters. It deserves support. The chilling of faculty speech and the restriction of what students can learn should alarm everyone who cares about democracy.

But the public narrative should also reflect the full coalition of communities that has been fighting this fight. Latino communities are not bystanders. As reflected in this very blog, we are part of the intellectual, legal, pedagogical, and political resistance to censorship in Texas higher education—and have been for a long time.

And this is not about recognition for recognition’s sake. It is about accuracy, accountability, and coalition. When the state targets race, gender, sexuality, immigration, Ethnic Studies, and DEI, it is not targeting one community at a time. It is targeting the very conditions that allow for a multiethnic/multiracial democracy to exist in public higher education.

Professors' union sues Texas Tech System over LGBTQ, race teaching restrictions

By Lily Kepner,Staff WriterUpdated July 8, 2026 1:05 p.m.

























Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, authored Senate Bill 26, which would invest more than $4 million in teacher pay increases.
Jay Janner/American-Statesman


A national professors' union and its Texas chapter are suing the Texas Tech University System’s chancellor and regents for restricting professors' ability to teach about LGBTQ identity, gender and race, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday in federal court.

Brandon Creighton, chancellor of the Texas Tech University System and a former Republican state senator, announced last academic year that the five universities he oversees could not teach courses that advocate for race or gender “prejudice” or mention that more than two genders exist.

In April, he canceled all academic programs “centered on” sexual orientation and said professors “generally” cannot teach courses that include LGBTQ themes.

Wednesday’s lawsuit, filed by the American Association of University Professors and its Texas chapter, alleges that the decisions violate the First and 14th amendments and censor course discussion.

“This case presents an extraordinary system of censorship in higher education, in which professors in the Texas Tech University System are prohibited from teaching the most basic scholarship, while at the same time not fully comprehending the contours of prohibitions that place them under threat of losing their employment and livelihood,” lawyers for the professors' union wrote in the filing. “To make matters worse, professors cannot reasonably make sense of what is and is not prohibited, further chilling their classroom speech.”

Creighton said in a statement that the university system is confident its policies are “lawful and compliant.”

“Our commitment to academic integrity and the First Amendment rights of our students and faculty will not be distracted by lawsuits as we continue our mission to deliver rigorous academic programs, relevant coursework, and groundbreaking research,” Creighton said.

What do the policies restrict?

Creighton, who championed legislation restricting faculty input and diversity, equity and inclusion practices at universities during his time in the Texas Legislature, has said the restrictions ensure the Texas Tech University System provides “rigorous” and valuable degrees.


There is no law restricting what can be taught in Texas higher education. In 2023, Creighton authored Senate Bill 16, which would have restricted teaching that compels students to adopt beliefs that one race or sex is superior. The bill did not pass.

A higher education reform bill he authored, Senate Bill 37, succeeded in giving regents more power over curriculum and defanging faculty governance in 2025, but it did not include specific restrictions on race and gender. Initial drafts included those limitations.


Regardless, university systems have increasingly adopted policies to restrict what professors can teach after a Texas A&M University professor was fired at Gov. Greg Abbott’s urging for teaching about gender identity.

The viral fallout ultimately resulted in the president of Texas A&M stepping down, and the A&M System restricting courses that “advocate” for gender identity or race. Before Creighton was appointed, the Texas Tech University System banned teaching that there were more than two genders, and the University of Texas System also announced an audit of courses concerning gender identity.

The professors' union lawsuit specifically targets two decisions from Creighton that go further. In one of his first acts as chancellor, Creighton banned advocacy or promotion of race or sex-based “prejudice.”

In April, when he announced the cancellation of programs that teach sexual orientation, or gender identity, Creighton instituted a “strict prohibition on (sexual orientation or gender identity) content in all core and lower-level undergraduate courses,” and on “instruction that advocates for concepts of inherent racial or sexual superiority, inherent bias, or collective guilt.” That order did not apply to teaching about historical events tied to LGBTQ and civil rights.

The legal filing states Creighton’s orders are too vague, “chilling” any speech that has to do with LGBTQ identity, gender or race. The Texas Tech System provided guidance on its restrictions, but the suit maintains that the orders suppressed professors' academic freedom.

TJ Geiger, the vice president of the Texas Tech University AAUP chapter, said that the policies have led to confusion across campus, leading to self-censorship and “inconsistent” directives to professors on what they can teach. The limits ultimately hurt students, who “are not getting a full, accurate, and complete education” if professors are censoring their teaching, he said.

“It’s just been a really tumultuous time leading to what I’ve characterized as intellectual and professional triage,” Geiger said. “Our otherwise good work and effort that would have gone into teaching and research has been directed toward trying to figure out where the lines are in terms of what we’re supposed to say or not say.”

What is the lawsuit seeking?

The 84-page court filing asks a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas to prevent Creighton’s directives from being enforced.


Antonio Ingram, senior counsel at the Legal Defense Fund, a legal organization focused on racial justice that is representing the professors' union, said the restrictions have prevented professors at Texas Tech University’s medical school from teaching about health disparities based on race, and left law professors unsure about how to teach about legal victories for racial equality.

A spokesperson for Creighton did not immediately respond to the claims.

“These are targeting Black communities, Black professors,” Ingram said. “We want the federal court in El Paso to declare the memorandums unconstitutional based on First Amendment violations, based on vagueness, and based on its racial discrimination.”

This is a breaking story that will be updated.


July 8, 2026|Updated July 8, 2026 1:05 p.m.

HIGHER EDUCATION REPORTER

Lily Kepner started at the American-Statesman in October 2023. She has appeared on BBC, NPR and Texas Standard to talk about her coverage, which has spanned the impact of state laws and politics on the University of Texas, pro-Palestinian protests, free speech, the anti-DEI ban, LGBTQ student belonging and more. Kepner graduated with honors from Boston University's College of Communication in 2023, where she received the college's highest awards for writing and journalism leadership and led the award-winning student newspaper as Editor-in-Chief. In her time with the American-Statesman, she contributed to reporting that won an Edward R Murrow Award for breaking news, won the School Bell Award for Outstanding Feature from Texas State Teachers Association, and Critics Choice for Best of Austin in the Austin Chronicle. Previously, she has been published in USA Today, The Boston Globe, The National Catholic Reporter and GBH. Kepner is passionate about accountability and service journalism and encourages anyone to reach out to her to tell their story or share a tip.

Saturday, April 25, 2026

Where Are the Democrats? Why Ignoring the Assault on Higher Education Is a Strategic Mistake By Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

Where Are the Democrats? Why Ignoring the Assault on Higher Education Is a Strategic Mistake

by

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.


April 25, 2026

At a moment when Texas is rapidly remaking higher education, the question posed at a recent gathering at the University of Texas—“Where are the Democrats?”—should not be dismissed as rhetorical. It is a warning.

Over the past three years, Texas Republicans have not merely criticized universities; they have systematically restructured them. Through Senate Bill 17, diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts have been dismantled. Through Senate Bill 37, faculty governance has been weakened and authority shifted upward to politically appointed boards. Beyond legislation, we are now witnessing the installation of former lawmakers as university system chancellors, direct pressure campaigns on faculty and programs, and the quiet but consequential narrowing of curricula—particularly in Mexican American Studies and Ethnic Studies more broadly.

This is not episodic policymaking. It is coordinated governance.

And yet, as Lily Kepner, writing for the Austin American-Statesman reports, Democratic leadership has largely chosen to sideline higher education as a central political issue heading into the midterms, citing the press of “kitchen table” concerns like affordability and health care. The calculus is familiar: higher education is perceived as politically risky, too easily caricatured, and insufficiently resonant with voters. 

This is precisely the miscalculation.

Higher education is a kitchen table issue. It is where students decide whether they belong. It is where families encounter the rising costs of tuition and the shrinking availability of programs that reflect their histories. It is where future teachers, nurses, engineers, and civic leaders are formed. To wit, it provides access to all of the professions. 

And increasingly, it is where political actors—rather than professors who have devoted their lives and careers to scholarship and teaching—are deciding what can be taught, what can be researched, and what can be said.

To treat this as peripheral is to concede the terrain.

Republican leaders understand this well. Their messaging—casting universities as sites of “indoctrination”—has been paired with policy that transforms governance structures, disciplines faculty speech, and reorients curriculum. As one policy advocate bluntly stated, the work of “getting rid of stuff” is giving way to a new phase: building a reordered university. That includes proposals to center “Western civilization” in core curricula, monitor foreign influence, and further regulate academic standards.

In other words, the project is not simply subtractive. It is reconstructive.

Democrats who choose not to engage this arena are not avoiding risk; they are absorbing it. By ceding narrative control, they allow higher education to be defined by its critics while alienating students, faculty, and communities already mobilizing in defense of it. They also miss an opportunity to connect higher education policy to the very concerns they claim to prioritize. Affordability, workforce development, and democratic participation are all shaped—profoundly—by what happens on our campuses.

There is also a deeper issue at stake: democracy itself.

When faculty self-censor out of fear, when programs like Mexican American Studies are administratively weakened or eliminated, when governance is restructured to minimize dissent, the university ceases to function as a space of inquiry and becomes instead a managed environment. What we are witnessing is not simply policy change, but a redefinition of the public university’s role in a democratic society.

This is why the current moment demands more than quiet concern or behind-the-scenes conversations. It requires a clear, public, and sustained defense of higher education as a public good.

To be sure, Democrats face real constraints in Texas. They do not control the legislature, and they are navigating multiple urgent crises. But political limitation is not the same as political absence. Messaging, coalition-building, and agenda-setting remain powerful tools—even, and especially, in minority positions.

Indeed, we have seen glimpses of what this could look like: public statements in defense of students, testimony challenging vague restrictions on classroom speech, and convenings that center free expression. But these efforts remain fragmented, intermittent, and insufficient to match the scale of the transformation underway.

Meanwhile, the consequences are anything but abstract. Students report feeling unheard. Faculty describe narrowing their syllabi. Entire fields—especially those grounded in the histories and experiences of communities of color—face an uncertain future.

And still, the question lingers: Where are the Democrats?

If higher education continues to be treated as a secondary issue, the answer will become increasingly clear—not in press conferences or policy papers, but in the very structure of our universities.

By 2027, when the Texas Legislature reconvenes, the groundwork being laid today will shape what is politically possible tomorrow. The choice is not whether to engage, but whether engagement comes too late.

Because by then, the question may no longer be where the Democrats are.

It may be whether there is anything left to defend.


Going into the midterms, Texas Republicans say they have momentum to build conservative values in higher ed. Some advocates say Democrats aren’t doing enough.

By Lily Kepner,Staff WriterApril 22, 2026

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, left, with Texas AFT President Zeph Capo,

 speaks at a news conference at the AFL-CIO in Austin on Tuesday, Jan. 6, 2026. Weingarten said in April

 that Democrats need to do more to address conservative reforms of higher education.

Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman



Randi Weingarten could have chosen anywhere to launch the American Federation of Teachers’ plan to elevate higher education issues in the midterm elections. She chose the University of Texas.

Weingarten, the president of the national teachers' union, last week spoke before a crowd of about 100 people gathered to oppose threats to academic freedom and protect ethnic studies programs at higher education institutions.

At UT, President Jim Davis has promised to address conservative concerns that the university has let indoctrination replace inquiry by recommitting his institution to “balance” and civic education. The changes during Davis' first year in office — including the consolidation of gender and ethnic studies and leadership shakeups — have made some faculty fearful that UT is changing in response to political pressure, not input from students, staff or the public.

Get the latest UT news from Lily Kepner delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for Inside UT.

At a time when Republicans are successfully reforming higher education, Democrats, Weingarten said, are not doing enough to stop them or to advocate for universities.

“We know where the Republicans stand,” Weingarten said. “We see this stripping out of people’s right to learn, right to teach, and we’re seeing the undermining of pluralism. And so part of my question — and I say this as a lifelong Democrat — is where are the Democrats? Where is the fight?”

Ahead of midterm elections, changes to higher education should be a central issue for Democrats, Weingarten said. But as conservatives are shaping Texas universities in their image, Democrats, experts say, can’t keep up — and may not benefit strategically from trying.

Michael Harris, dean of Southern Methodist University’s Simmons School of Education and Human Development and an expert in university behavior, said Republicans in Texas “without question,” have controlled the narrative around higher education for decades.

But how Texas conservative leaders have reshaped the state’s colleges and universities is unlikely to be a big factor in the midterm elections for Democrats given the success Republicans have already had and the other pressing national issues dominating the news, he said.

Kendall Scudder, chairman of the Texas Democratic Party, said that the party considers education access a “kitchen table issue” and is concerned about how political interference will impact educator retention. But Texas Democrats are limited in what they can message on as other issues like affordability or health care intensify, he said.

The party isn’t intentionally sidestepping higher education, but it is prioritizing other pressing concerns families face, he said.

“I understand this frustration from these organizations with us, I get it, but the challenge that Democrats are facing is that we’re drinking through a fire hose,” Scudder said. “Of course, these issues are important to us. I mean, we are the ones who created these institutions and invested in them in the first place, and that could be part of why Republicans are trying to tear them down.”

‘Now we can finally start’

As Democrats fight other battles, Republicans will want to center education in the midterms because their messaging works, said Cal Jillson, a politics professor at SMU.

“They’re running against universities as hotbeds of socialism,” Jillson said. “And that intimidates and frightens lots of parents.”

Republicans are also in a position of power to drive the debate around higher education in Texas, Harris said.

Since 2023, Texas Republican lawmakers — who hold a majority in the Texas Senate and House and every statewide seat — have banned diversity, equity and inclusion programs at universities, weakened tenure, curbed free speech and gutted faculty’s role in governing their schools.

This year, conservatives have secured non-legislative wins too, pressuring universities to fire professors and eliminate classes and departments targeted for being too liberal. Since the beginning of 2025, three former conservative lawmakers were named chancellors of state university systems, putting them in a position to further change how their universities operate.

Texas Tech University Chancellor Brandon Creighton is one of those newly

Sen. Brandon Creighton looks over paperwork with his staff at a Senate Committee on Education hearing.

Creighton now leads the Texas Tech University System as chancellor. He is one of several Republicans appointed to higher education leadership positions in 2026.

Ricardo B. Brazziell/American-Statesman
appointed conservative leaders. He authored major higher education 
reforms laws as a state senator and was critical of perceived indoctrination at universities. At a recent conference hosted by the conservative think tank Texas Public Policy Foundation, he told the audience that there was “garbage” in higher education curriculum that he and others had to root out.  

Glenn Hegar, the newly appointed chancellor of the Texas A&M University System is now overseeing a vast overhaul of how LGBTQ, gender and race topics are taught at all his system campuses.

Before 2027, when the Texas Legislature next meets for a regular session, Republicans are planning how to be more proactive around higher education policy.

“We’ve been getting rid of stuff in higher ed, and now finally we can actually start to pass things instead of clearing the way,” said Kate Bierly, higher education policy director for TPPF.

In an interview, Bierly said the think tank is planning future changes, including drafting legislation that would center Western civilization in core curriculum, curb foreign influence and target grade inflation.

‘An assault on public education’

Higher education is certainly not above reproach, according to the Pew Research Center, which found 70% of Americans believe higher education is heading in the wrong direction. Universities are to blame for the public’s lack of trust, a report from a specially appointed Yale University committee concluded this week.

The committee, charged with investigating public distrust in higher education, found that grade inflation, varied intellectual experience, political correctness, affordability challenges and investments into areas outside of a university’s core academic purpose detract from universities’ ability to build public trust and grow and produce knowledge.

“Both sides of the political aisle should be alarmed and even appalled at the lack of quality civic education that kids are getting at universities,” Bierly said in an interview before the report was released. She added that her organization’s suggested policies could gain bipartisan support.


But Weingarten said the Republican-controlled discourse discredits the good higher education already does and distracts from pressing issues like affordability and equal college access.

AFT’s policy blueprint for the midterms centers around broad issues with wide appeal, including regulating artificial intelligence and enhancing career education and innovation. The teachers’ union higher education platform also outwardly opposes the federal government’s “unprecedented campaign to control higher education” through research and program cuts that threaten the institutions, she said.


Weingarten said the policies are something either party could adopt to get higher education back on track. But Democrats aren’t engaging, she said, and in doing so, they’re leaving higher education behind.

Centering higher education’s value and adopting AFT’s platform before the midterms would be an unnecessary political risk for Democrats with little potential reward, Jillson, the political scientist, said.

Because of the Republican majority, “it is very difficult for Democrats in Texas to shape issue definition, let alone policy,” he said. With affordability issues and the declining trust in President Donald Trump’s leadership, Democrats, he said, “should play the hand that they hold right now.” They should focus on attacking Republican policies instead of trying to define new ones, Jillson said.

“Much of the public believes that there are issues and problems that need to be addressed and resolved. So you can’t just be a proponent of higher education as it currently exists without some danger,” said Jillson. “Certainly they don’t want to make it a midterm issue.”

That wasn’t always the case. Two years ago, Democrats often stood with students in opposition to Republican policies on college campuses. U.S. Rep. Greg Casar, D-Austin, visited UT with other Democrats the day after dozens of people were arrested at a pro-Palestinian protest. Texas Democrats also drafted statements and made public remarks opposing UT’s decision to fire staff after it adopted Senate Bill 17, a law banning diversity, equity and inclusion support for students.

At the AFT press conference last week, Casar, who is up for reelection, decried Texas’ “extremist politicians trying to control what gets taught in our classroom,” but left before questions. Colin Diersing, a spokesperson for Casar, declined to respond to criticism from AFT on Democrats’ lack of action or answer if Casar has reached out to Texas university leaders directly.

Still, some Texas Democrats are paying closer attention and weighing in on higher education changes in their own way. Last December, the Texas House Democratic Caucus held a virtual “People’s Caucus” on free speech in December to counter an official interim hearing focused on civil discourse after Charlie Kirk’s murder.

In November, Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin, who is the vice chair of the House Higher Education Committee, testified against the UT System Board of Regents’ policy limiting how professors can discuss controversial topics. The lawmaker said she feared the policy would be too vague and could chill classroom debate. The board thanked her, but passed the policy regardless.

At the same press conference Casar spoke at, Howard said she has met privately with UT President Davis to share her concerns on academic freedom and pressure from conservatives and the federal government. She said she knows leaders may be “hesitant” to meet with a Democrat in this political climate.

“There is probably less communication going on than there should be and that I would like to see,” Howard said about the relationship between Democrats and university leaders. “The leadership of the institutions have been put in a very difficult position.”

UT did not respond to requests for comment.

On the windy march to the Texas Capitol where Weingarten launched AFT’s higher education policy platform, students, professors and community members chanted: “Save UT.”

Professors spoke of censoring themselves out of fear of retaliation if they said the wrong thing. Students spoke of their desire to be heard in university decisions impacting the classes and programs available to them.

“If you are fighting against the assaults on higher education and trying to make the case about how important it is to the next generation of students,” Weingarten said. “Why not go right to the place where the fight is?”


April 22, 2026

Lily Kepner
HIGHER EDUCATION REPORTER

Lily Kepner started at the American-Statesman in October 2023. She has appeared on BBC, NPR and Texas Standard to talk about her coverage, which has spanned the impact of state laws and politics on the University of Texas, pro-Palestinian protests, free speech, the anti-DEI ban, LGBTQ student belonging and more. Kepner graduated with honors from Boston University's College of Communication in 2023, where she received the college's highest awards for writing and journalism leadership and led the award-winning student newspaper as Editor-in-Chief. In her time with the American-Statesman, she contributed to reporting that won an Edward R Murrow Award for breaking news, won the School Bell Award for Outstanding Feature from Texas State Teachers Association, and Critics Choice for Best of Austin in the Austin Chronicle. Previously, she has been published in USA Today, The Boston Globe, The National Catholic Reporter and GBH. Kepner is passionate about accountability and service journalism and encourages anyone to reach out to her to tell their story or share a tip.