Texas A&M Legal Pushback on Teaching Limits
By Darius Spearman (africanelements)
Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.
The Texas A&M University System is now at the center of a major legal battle. A new policy that puts strict limits on how professors can teach about race and gender has drawn sharp condemnation. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF) is leading the charge, arguing these rules attack academic freedom and will unfairly harm Black professors and students (dallasnews.com). This fight at Texas A&M is not happening in a vacuum. It is a key moment in a nationwide effort to dismantle Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs and control conversations about race in our schools. Understanding how we got here requires looking at the history behind the headlines. The story begins with academic ideas that sought to explain inequality and ends with political movements seeking to silence them.
The Genesis of a Culture War: CRT and DEI
To understand today’s debates, we must go back to the origins of Critical Race Theory (CRT). This academic framework grew out of legal studies in the 1970s and 1980s. Scholars like Derrick Bell and Kimberlé Crenshaw felt that the progress of the Civil Rights Movement had stalled. They developed CRT to examine how laws and institutions in America continue to produce racial inequality, even when they appear neutral (blackpast.org). A central idea of CRT is that racism is not just about individual prejudice. Instead, it is systemic, woven into the fabric of our society’s structures (blackpast.org). By the 1990s, educators began using CRT to understand why racial disparities persisted in schools, highlighting how educational systems could favor white cultural norms while ignoring minority experiences (blackpast.org).
Following this, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives became more common in higher education. Universities created these programs to build more welcoming environments for students from all backgrounds, including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals, and veterans (bestcolleges.com). DEI aimed to ensure schools followed non-discrimination laws, addressed historical inequities, and fostered an inclusive climate on campus. These efforts were designed to provide support and create opportunity. Unfortunately, this work would soon face intense political opposition.
The National Backlash Against DEI
The early 2020s marked a major turning point. Conservative politicians began to aggressively target CRT and DEI. They frequently mischaracterized these concepts, portraying them as divisive tools that promote “anti-white racism” (mostpolicyinitiative.org). Critics often inaccurately claim that CRT is about teaching children to feel guilt or shame about American history (edweek.org). Similarly, DEI programs have been misrepresented as a form of “reverse discrimination” that harms merit-based systems (wikipedia.org). This political movement led to a wave of legislation aimed at banning “divisive concepts” in schools across the country, first in K-12 and then in public universities (mostpolicyinitiative.org).
This coordinated campaign has had a measurable effect on higher education nationwide. Since 2023, state lawmakers have passed numerous laws restricting DEI. By September 2025, 22 states had passed legislation that cut DEI funding, shut down diversity departments, and ended related trainings and hiring practices (dallasnews.com). These actions have created a climate of fear and uncertainty on college campuses. In addition to creating a hostile environment, the backlash ignores widespread student support for these initiatives. A 2022 survey showed that 88% of students believe colleges should fund programs that support historically marginalized groups (dallasnews.com).
Anti-DEI Legislation Across the U.S. (2023-2025)
Data reflects the rapid increase in state-level legislation targeting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives.
Texas A&M’s New Classroom Restrictions
Texas has been a central battleground in this national fight. In 2023, the legislature passed Senate Bill 17, which effectively banned DEI offices and programs at all public universities starting in January 2024 (dallasnews.com). As a result, schools like the University of Texas at Austin closed their Multicultural Engagement Center (dallasnews.com). Then, in June 2025, Senate Bill 37 further tightened the screws. This law limited academic freedom by giving governor-appointed regents final say over new courses and banning lessons that “advocate or promote” certain ideas about race or sex (dallasnews.com).
The new policy at Texas A&M, passed on November 13, 2025, is a direct outcome of this political pressure (dallasnews.com). Under these rules, professors must now get approval from the campus president for any course that could be seen as promoting “race or gender ideology.” The policy vaguely defines “race ideology” as anything that “attempts to shame a particular race” or “promotes activism” (dallasnews.com). This move represents a radical departure from traditional academic norms, where faculty-led committees typically handle course approval to ensure rigor and expertise. This centralization of power chills academic freedom, which is the principle that allows teachers and students to explore ideas without fear of censorship or punishment (aaup.org). The policy was partly triggered by conservative outrage over a student secretly recording a professor discussing gender identity, showing how isolated incidents can be used to justify sweeping restrictions (dallasnews.com).
Faculty Response to Anti-DEI Climate
A recent study highlights the severe personal and professional toll of anti-DEI legislation on university faculty.
Erasing Black Voices from the Curriculum
The NAACP Legal Defense Fund, a leading civil rights law organization completely separate from the NAACP, has condemned the Texas A&M policy as an “alarming escalation” (naacpldf.org). Founded by Thurgood Marshall, the LDF has a long history of fighting for racial justice through the courts, including its famous victory in *Brown v. Board of Education* (naacpldf.org). The LDF argues that these new rules will disproportionately harm Black faculty and students. This harm happens when faculty who specialize in race and inequality feel forced to self-censor their teaching and research to avoid punishment (dallasnews.com). This creates an educational environment where Black students do not see their histories or lived experiences reflected in the curriculum, making them feel invisible and undervalued.
This academic silencing is a form of erasure. When discussions about systemic racism are restricted, students are denied a complete understanding of American society. For Black faculty, these policies create intense professional pressure. They may face greater scrutiny and risk to their careers for simply teaching within their areas of expertise (dallasnews.com). The LDF’s Senior Counsel, Antonio L. Ingram II, states the policy threatens to erase Black histories and experiences from the classroom altogether (dallasnews.com). Consequently, this is not just an academic debate; it is a fight over whose stories are allowed to be told.
Why DEI Bans Hurt Graduation Rates
Critics of DEI bans fear they will worsen the already significant graduation rate gaps for Black and Hispanic students. In 2023, Texas data showed a stark disparity: the four-year graduation rate for African American students at public universities was just 29%, compared to 53% for white students (dallasnews.com). This gap is not accidental. It is the result of complex factors, including historical underinvestment in K-12 schools in Black communities, which leaves students less prepared for college (epi.org). Systemic barriers in higher education, such as a lack of culturally relevant support and mentorship, also play a major role. Socioeconomic factors, like lower family wealth, often force Black students to work while in school, making it harder to graduate on time (epi.org).
DEI programs were created specifically to address these deep-seated problems. They often provide crucial mentorship programs, connecting students with faculty who understand their challenges. They also fund cultural centers that offer safe spaces and a sense of community, which is vital for student well-being and persistence (dallasnews.com). Without these support systems, Black students are more likely to feel isolated and disengaged, increasing the chances they will not complete their degrees. Therefore, eliminating DEI is not just removing an office; it is taking away a lifeline that helps students navigate an often-unwelcoming environment and succeed.
Texas 4-Year Graduation Rate Disparity (2023)
Data from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board shows significant racial gaps in graduation rates before DEI bans took full effect.
About the Author
Darius Spearman is a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College, where he has been teaching for over 20 years. He is the founder of African Elements, a media platform dedicated to providing educational resources on the history and culture of the African diaspora. Through his work, Spearman aims to empower and educate by bringing historical context to contemporary issues affecting the Black community.
