BY LAUREN GUTTERMAN AND LISA L. MOORE

On February 22nd, 2024, Dr. Paige Schilt, a social worker, author, and former lecturer and staff member at the University of Texas at Austin, was scheduled to give a talk entitled “A Queer Path to Leadership: Finding a Mentor to Help You Succeed in Higher Education.” It was part of a lecture series at the university for first-year students sponsored by the undergraduate college. Schilt’s talk would have focused on navigating college and developing a support network. It would also have discussed the career of Schilt’s father, who came out as gay while chancellor of the University of Houston system. But the undergraduate college pulled Schilt’s planned lecture at the last minute, replacing her with another speaker without public explanation. Upon questioning, administrators stated that UT Austin’s legal team had urged them not to permit the lecture because it risked violating Senate Bill (SB) 17, the anti-DEI law which went into effect in January.

The cancellation of Schilt’s lecture is an early example of the ways that academic administrators at public colleges and universities in Texas are violating academic freedom and free expression by over-complying with SB 17 or otherwise allowing it to create a chilling effect. Schilt’s lecture was not a DEI training or program. It was rather a component of UT Austin’s much lauded Signature Course program. Courses in the program are designed to introduce “first-year students to the university’s academic community through the exploration of new interests” and to acclimate new students to the more rigorous “college-level thinking and learning” required by the university. Schilt’s planned lecture was one of three possible Herbert Family University Lectures Signature Course students could have attended to fulfill their class curriculum.

The text of SB 17 states explicitly that the legislation “may not be construed to apply to academic course instruction” or to students, faculty, research personnel, guest speakers, or performers. UT Austin president Jay Hartzell personally reassured the campus community following the passage of SB 17 in spring 2023 that “the bill’s protections for our teaching and research are immediately apparent.” Furthermore, Hartzell has repeatedly affirmed his commitment to protecting free speech on UT Austin’s campus and even sponsored a #UTFreeSpeechWeek this past fall. Why, then, was Schilt prevented from speaking? Apparently, UT Austin’s leaders considered Schilt’s talk problematic because they believe that a member of the university’s staff cannot give a lecture that discusses LGBTQ+ people and has ‘queer’ in the title. Never mind the fact that Schilt is not currently a staff member and was asked to give the lecture as a guest speaker. This censorship sets us back decades, and sends a chilling and contradictory message to students and faculty on a campus that proclaims “You Belong Here.”

Academic freedom is a mainstay of the American system of higher education and democracy itself. According to the American Association of University Professors, academic freedom is “the freedom of a teacher or researcher in higher education to investigate and discuss the issues in his or her academic field, and to teach or publish findings without interference from political figures, boards of trustees, donors, or other entities.” It is perhaps unsurprising that this early example of the infringement on academic freedom in the wake of SB 17 concerns LGBTQ+ people. Following a slate of anti-LGBTQ+ laws passed during the Eighty-Eighth Texas Legislature, civil rights groups in Texas recently filed a petition with the United Nations accusing the state of violating international human rights treaties. But Schilt’s lecture is a canary in the coal mine, warning of possible violations of academic freedom to come. What other academic opportunities and educational resources will our students lose because of UT Austin leaders’ overly broad interpretation of SB 17?

In the spring of 2023, advocates of higher education in Texas, including students, professors, and citizen groups, successfully advocated against provisions in SB 17 as well as another bill that would have limited our ability to teach and learn freely. By interpreting SB 17 in ways that violate academic freedom, UT Austin’s administrators are acting as if that fight was lost. They are failing our students and setting a dangerous precedent. If UT Austin’s leaders hope to protect our institution’s international reputation and the quality of the education we provide, they must not allow SB 17 to diminish the intellectual diversity that faculty, researchers, and visiting speakers offer on campus.

Lauren Gutterman is associate professor of American Studies and Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. She is a member of the UT Austin AAUP chapter’s executive committee. Lisa L. Moore is Archibald A. Hill professor of English and chair of the Department of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. This editorial represents her personal views only.