(NEW YORK)—PEN America today expressed deep concern over the University of North Texas (UNT) system’s implementation of Texas SB 17, a 2023 law banning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) offices and initiatives, arguing that the system’s efforts to scrutinize course instruction and research for references to DEI is an example of extreme overcompliance with the law’s mandate.
SB 17 explicitly exempts from the ban “academic course instruction” and “scholarly research or a creative work” by students, faculty, or other research personnel. Nevertheless, UNT’s compliance office has taken drastic measures that go far beyond the requirements of the law, prohibiting any mention of diversity themes in a broad swath of courses and some faculty research. At a faculty senate meeting last month, Chief Compliance Officer Clay Simmons said that for research to include any references to identity categories, scholars would have to demonstrate how such categories are “essential” to the research. “So if you’re doing research on homelessness,” he said, “you have to be very careful if you’re going to focus on a certain identity within homelessness.” Simmons also showed faculty a slide indicating that “classroom lessons on DEI topics must be limited to elements of the course,” such that “a class on mathematics may not include an activity on SB 17-prohibited topics, whether graded or not” – foreclosing the possibility of, for instance, using a statistics problem that discusses differences in wealth or employment by race.
“Making up provisions in SB 17 that do not exist is the hallmark of a higher education system that has gone totally rogue,” said Jeremy C. Young, PEN America’s Freedom to Learn program director. “The situation at UNT is one of the most extreme cases of overcompliance with a censorship law we have ever seen. SB 17 already restricts diversity initiatives and programming on campus, which is bad enough. But by extending the reach of this law into areas explicitly protected by the legislation itself, UNT is not only misinterpreting the law but also putting faculty members’ academic freedom in severe jeopardy.”
Particularly alarming was Simmons’ response to a question about whether UNT’s restrictions limited academic freedom. Simmons said, “I don’t think that this really impinges on academic freedom, because it’s a state law now. State law is kind of at the very top of the hierarchy when you’re determining what’s allowable within an institution and what’s not.”
“UNT seems to be arguing that the principle of academic freedom only exists when state law allows it,” Young continued. “This ludicrous interpretation effectively nullifies academic freedom as a protection against government censorship, setting a perilous precedent for higher education institutions across Texas and potentially beyond. University leaders should view this as a cautionary tale, reminding them to resist overly broad interpretations of censorship laws and to vigorously defend the principles of academic freedom and open inquiry that are essential to the mission of higher education.”
About PEN America
PEN America stands at the intersection of literature and human rights to protect free expression in the United States and worldwide. We champion the freedom to write, recognizing the power of the word to transform the world. Our mission is to unite writers and their allies to celebrate creative expression and defend the liberties that make it possible.