Two faculty groups have filed a federal lawsuit challenging new policies imposed by the Texas Tech University System that restrict how race, gender, and sexual orientation can be discussed in the classroom. The lawsuit targets directives issued by Texas Tech Chancellor Brandon Creighton, alleging that the policies infringe on academic freedom and violate professors’ constitutional rights.
The policies in question include a December memo banning content that suggests any race or sex is inherently superior to another and prohibiting faculty from teaching that more than two sexes exist. An April memo further ordered the elimination of all academic degrees centered on sexual orientation and gender identity. Together, these directives apply across the system’s five institutions—Angelo State University, Midwestern State University, Texas Tech University, and two health sciences centers—which serve approximately 64,000 students in Texas.
The lawsuit, brought by the national American Association of University Professors and its Texas chapter, names Chancellor Creighton, a former Republican legislator, and the system’s Board of Regents as defendants. It contends that the policies violate the First Amendment by suppressing professors’ constitutionally protected speech and the Fourteenth Amendment by creating vague and ambiguous rules that jeopardize faculty employment without clear guidance. According to the filing, this ambiguity has created a chilling effect, deterring instructors from engaging in historically and culturally important discussions.
The lawsuit also alleges that the restrictions intentionally discriminate against Black faculty members by prohibiting meaningful conversations about the historical and ongoing impacts of racial discrimination in Texas. One cited example involves a law professor who was barred from teaching material related to the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott v. Sandford decision, which declared Black individuals were not U.S. citizens. Medical faculty allegedly were directed to remove content related to the care of transgender patients and racial minorities. No individual professors are named in the complaint.
Chancellor Creighton has defended the policies as necessary to comply with applicable laws, Board of Regents policies, and his own directives. He has framed them as part of a system-wide review under Senate Bill 37, a state law aimed at ensuring that required courses are foundational and workforce-ready. This law, authored by Creighton before assuming his current role, grants regents greater authority over course content at Texas public universities. However, there is no state law explicitly banning instruction or discussion related to race, gender identity, or sexual orientation in public higher education.
Faculty representatives argue these restrictions undermine critical skills such as critical thinking and productive disagreement—abilities they say are essential for students’ success in the workplace. TJ Geiger, vice president of the Texas Tech AAUP chapter, emphasized that ignoring issues of race and gender does not make them disappear but instead leaves students unprepared for real-world challenges.
Legal counsel representing the faculty groups expressed hope that a favorable ruling could establish precedent to block similar policies at other Texas institutions, including the Texas A&M System. Antonio Ingram, senior counsel with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, characterized the Texas Tech policies as a severe form of censorship and warned against allowing such measures to spread to other universities.
Texas Tech University System representatives did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the lawsuit. The case highlights ongoing tensions in Texas and nationwide over academic freedom, curriculum control, and the role of universities in addressing issues related to race, gender, and identity.