The assassination of Charlie Kirk and the subsequent public celebration of political violence by some individuals within higher education revealed a deep and systemic problem. It demonstrated a cultural breakdown in which intimidation and outrage have too often replaced the open, respectful exchange of ideas that defines a free society.
Texans expect colleges and universities to provide students with the tools they need to participate in an educated society and make a life for themselves in a fulfilling career. They also expect that our public colleges and universities will do so in a transparent and accountable manner. However, in recent months, the nation has witnessed troubling scenes that strike at the heart of those expectations.
Reports of foreign influence in our higher education research institutions and recent social media posts showing professors departing from their established course descriptions to impart personal opinions as fact have reinforced the perception that accountability is lacking and has further eroded confidence in public institutions of higher education.
Though the most egregious examples of these issues have come up in the last few months, the Texas Legislature has been tracking them for years and acted earlier this year to set up a permanent framework to root out the woke agenda that has infected our higher education institutions.
As Chairman of the House Higher Education Committee, it was my honor to pick up the baton of Higher Education Reforms from the previous session, building on their success of reforming tenure and keeping men out of women’s sports. Over this three-article series, I will be going over the issues of transparency, free speech, foreign influence, and the bills that addressed them.
First, let’s lake a look at Senate Bill 37, which will help ensure long term transparency and accountability without inhibiting our higher education institutions from fulfilling their true purpose. The legislation took effect September 1, 2025, with most provisions being implemented fully by January 1, 2026.
A Comprehensive Framework
SB 37 equips institutions with a comprehensive set of tools to ensure integrity across curriculum, governance, and leadership.
Each university or college system is governed by a Board of Regents appointed by the governor. These highly qualified citizens who come from outside of the bureaucracy provide oversight for the schools within the system and select the leadership of each institution.
SB 37 tasks Boards of Regents with conducting a review of all general education curricula every five years, confirming that courses are foundational, affordable, and relevant to civic life and workforce needs. Degree and certificate programs with persisting low enrollment or little labor-market demand must be justified or consolidated. To reduce inefficiencies, courses not taught in two consecutive years may be removed from catalogs, preventing unnecessary offerings that delay graduation and add costs.
The law also clarifies the role of faculty senates, which, in the past, often varied widely across institutions. The legislature made this change because, as former Chairman of the Senate Committee on Higher Education, Brandon Creighton, noted, “For too long, unelected faculty senates have operated behind closed doors, steering curriculum decisions, influencing institutional policy, issuing political statements…, and even organizing votes of ‘no confidence’ that undermine public trust.”
SB 37 reaffirms that Faculty Senates are advisory bodies only, operating under rules adopted by governing boards. Furthermore, leadership accountability is strengthened through mandatory annual evaluations of academic leaders and board participation in presidential searches.
Regents will now receive enhanced training on fiduciary duty, budgeting, and oversight to ensure consistent, informed governance across every system in the state.
Accountability
Another central piece of SB 37 is the creation of an Office of the Ombudsman within the Higher Education Coordinating Board. For the first time in history, students, faculty, and administrators will have an independent office outside campus bureaucracy to resolve complaints involving governance, curriculum, or hiring. The Ombudsman is appointed by the Governor, operates under strict statutory timelines, and may recommend withholding state funding if institutions refuse to comply with law or board approved policies.
By establishing a formal channel for grievances outside of any one university system, the Ombudsman ensures that no grievance brought forward by a student, professor, or administrator will go unheard, while strengthening the due process rights of those against whom complaints are made.
That stronger independent process comes with greater accountability. Should an institution fail to comply with the Ombudsman’s ruling, the state will withhold all funds until they follow the Ombudsman’s ruling and come into compliance with state law.
Together, these measures provide a clear, uniform process for accountability while protecting due process for all involved.
Implementation Underway
Implementation is already underway. Governing boards have dissolved faculty senates as required by September 1, 2025, and are now preparing for the full governance and curriculum obligations that take effect January 1, 2026.
Two of our flagship institutions, the University of Texas Austin and Texas A&M University, have fully dissolved their faculty senates, choosing to find more productive ways to preserve faculty input while ensuring decision-making rests with publicly appointed Regents. Other institutions have chosen to re-establish their faculty senates, but have done so under the new framework, with clearly established boundaries between the duties of faculty and of the administration.
In the new year, Regents will assume expanded authority over hiring; institutions will begin the new curriculum and low-enrollment program reviews; presidents will complete annual evaluations of key academic officers; and shared governance will be formally redefined to affirm regent authority. The Coordinating Board is setting up the Ombudsman’s office, which will begin accepting complaints in early 2026.
Together, these steps form the foundation for the broader, long-term vision that this landmark legislation will achieve.
A Long-Term Solution
SB 37 was not written for a single moment or single controversy. It represents the culmination of years of work to build a structure of accountability and transparency that can endure across administrations and political climates. The Select Committee on Civil Discourse & Freedom of Speech in Higher Education now carries that vision forward, bringing together students, educators, law enforcement, and state leaders to confront the real challenges of campus culture today: the silencing of dissent, the erosion of civil discourse, and the growing acceptance of violence. These are not partisan issues, they are moral imperatives that define who we are as a free society.
Transparency, accountability, and due process are the foundations of public trust. Through SB 37 and the ongoing work of the Select Committee, Texas is proving that it is possible to defend open expression, maintain order, and honor the rights of every student and educator under the rule of law.
Next Article: Civil Discourse and Freedom of Speech in Higher Education
In September of 2025, following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Speaker Burrows and Lieutenant Governor Patrick came together to form select committees to examine civil discourse and freedom of speech in higher education, and asked me to serve as chairman of the House’s committee.
In my next article, I will be laying out the work our committees will be doing over the next year, as well as giving an overview of Senate Bill 2972, which passed earlier this year, and how it addressed many of the free speech issues that have developed at our universities over the last few years.