23-06-2025
Texas Governor Signs Bill That Throttles Public University Senates
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has signed SB 37 into law, greatly restricting the powers of university ... More faculty senates. (Photo by)
Texas has passed a wide-ranging law that greatly diminishes the size, influence and independence of the faculty senates at its public colleges and universities.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed Senate Bill 37 into law on June 22, the deadline for him to sign or veto legislation. The Texas State Legislature had passed the bill on May 31 after it went through several revisions.
The new law, authored by Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, contains several elements that significantly strengthen the power of university governing boards and central administrators over the curriculum, hiring of university personnel, program review and other academic matters. It becomes effective September 1.
It also strips away much of the authority that duly constituted faculty bodies have held under the traditional norms of shared governance and shifts it to the political appointees who constitute institutional governing boards.
For example, administrators and boards often have deferred to faculty opinon about general education requirements, but in Texas, that might no longer be the case because under the new law, a governing board 'may reserve the right to overturn any decision made by the institution regarding any changes to the general education curriculum.'
The legislation also creates a new "Office of the Ombudsman' within the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Appointed by the governor, that office will have the power to investigate allegations that universities are not following the dictates of SB 37 and other legislative requirements, and it can threaten their funding if they don't comply with the law.
However, it's the law's new constraints on the composition and role of faculty senates that have generated some of the most heated debate between opponents and proponents. Here are six ways that faculty senates at Texas institutions will be affected by the new law.
According to the new law, "only the governing board of an institution of higher education may establish a faculty council or senate at the institution." If a board decided to do away with such a body, the law appears to permit it. If a board decides to authorize a faculty senate, it alone has the power to define how members are selected, consistent with other provisions summarized below.
A governing board must ensure that the senate ensures adequate representation of faculty from each college at the institution, but unless the board decides otherwise, the law sets the maximum number of senate members at 60, with at least two representatives coming from each college or school at an institution.
Of those 60, the bill requires that, of the two representatives from each college or school, one member is appointed by the president or chief executive officer of the institution, with 'the remaining members elected by a vote of the faculty of the member's respective college or school.'
In addition, the law gives a university's president or chief executive officer the power to appoint a senate's presiding officer, associate presiding officer, and secretary. And, under the new law, it's the president who gets to specify how an institution's senate conducts its meetings.
SB 37 sets different term limits for faculty senate members, depending on whether they were elected or presidentially appointed. Presidential appointees are permitted to serve six consecutive years before having to take a break for two years, but elected members are permitted to serve only two years before having to take the required two-year break.
Faculty can have their senate membership removed at any time. According to the bill, faculty members could be be immediately removed from a senate for 'failing to conduct the member's responsibilities within the council's or senate's parameters, failing to attend council or senate meetings, or engaging in other similar misconduct.'
In addition, they 'may be removed on recommendation of the institution's provost and approval by the institution's president or chief executive officer.'
According to the bill a faculty senate 'is advisory only and may not be delegated the final decision-making authority on any matter.' In addition, a faculty senate 'may not issue any statement or publish a report using the institution's official seal, trademark, or resources funded by the institution on any matter not directly related to the council's or senate's duties to advise the institution administration.'
Not surprisingly, the new law has generated a wide range of reactions. Supporters contend it will help end what they believe is the liberal bias of higher education faculty.
Creighton, SB 37's author, insists the measure was necessary to increase transparency and end faculty's politicalization of universities.
"For too long, unelected faculty senates have operated behind closed doors, steering curriculum decisions, influencing institutional policy, issuing political statements to divest from Israel, and even organizing votes of 'no confidence' that undermine public trust," he said. "SB 37 reaffirms that the authority belongs to the board of regents so that our universities can stay focused on what matters: educating students, conducting research and preparing the next generation of Texas leaders."
A National Review columnist agreed, claiming, 'it is the professors and their fundamental disconnect from reality that are leading higher education astray. By freeing Texas schools from the grip of zealous faculty members, S.B. 37 can serve as a model for other states facing left-wing radicalism.'
Critics, however, contend that the law represents big government overreach, undermines shared governance, increases partisan political influence, and jeopardizes academic freedom.
Brian Evans, president of the Texas Conference of the American Association of University Professors, said SB 37 "imperils the foundations of our higher education system and threatens Texas' ability to recruit and retain faculty at the head of their fields, as well as students driven to learn and engage critically with complex subjects. SB 37 will put what we teach in the hands of political appointees rather than in the hands of faculty who have studied these subjects and understand their nuances. The passage of SB 37 is a dark day for Texas colleges and universities, with many more to come."
Attempts to strip faculty senates of their influence have become an increasingly popular strategy among conservative legislators in other states, and some university presidents have even led the charge at their institutions. However, Texas's sweeping new law may represent the most aggressive state attempt yet to throttle the role of faculty in university shared governance. That's been an oft-stated goal of several of the state's elected officials, including Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick.
As a former university president, I appreciate how frustrating the pace and the debates of faculty senates can sometimes be. But like many other administrators, I also learned how the collective voice of faculty members elected by their peers could frequently contribute to better decision-making in the long run. Texas may now have a chance to learn that same lesson.
