Texas Professors, Students Say Voices Silenced on Bill Reshaping Campus Governance

Several students and faculty members from Texas universities voiced their dissatisfaction after being barred from testifying against a proposed bill that they argue could significantly threaten academic freedom and collaborative governance within higher education.

On May 6, the House Higher Education Committee unexpectedly halted registration for public testimony on Senate Bill 37, a mere 26 minutes into the hearing, marking a significant deviation from standard procedure. 

A proposed bill aims to consolidate authority among politically appointed university regents, thereby restricting faculty involvement in key areas such as academic decisions, curricula, and hiring practices.

Dr. Pauline Strong, a professor of anthropology at the University of Texas at Austin, was among approximately 20 individuals who could not address the audience. “It was a mix of disappointment, surprise, and disheartenment,” she stated. “I originated from Austin.” A significant number of individuals traveled from much greater distances.

Sen. Brandon Creighton has introduced SB 37, which has already received approval from the Senate. This legislation is part of a larger initiative to transform higher education in Texas. 

Concerns have been raised that this move may stifle dissenting opinions and lead to the politicization of university leadership. A new bill paves the way for universities to face investigations and possible defunding if they are found to violate state law.

Representing the Texas American Federation of Teachers, Amanda Garcia issued a stark warning: “This isn’t a bill we can clean up later.” The impact on students and educators is expected to be lasting and detrimental.

Chair Rep. Terry M. Wilson, R-Georgetown, stood by his decision to establish the timeframe for testimony, yet did not provide a rationale for the early termination. Wilson permitted lengthy testimony regarding another contentious bill the previous week.

Observers, including political scientist Brandon Rottinghaus, have pointed out that the session's hurried nature frequently restricts opportunities for public input. 

Critics argue that the restrictions on public comment outlined in SB 37 were deliberately designed and indicate a broader effort to suppress academic voices.

‍