<body><div><img src="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&amp;url=0Wd4A6_1FWuybW000" alt="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=0Wd4A6_1FWuybW000" width="800" height="450" >Collectives of Texas Tech students and faculty are continuing to fight against the university’s course-content changes, pursuing legal intervention and mobilizing to have Chancellor Brandon Creighton removed from office. The debate centers on a series of memorandums published from Sept. 2025 to April 2026, which directed the Tech University System to review course content related to DEI, sexual orientation and gender identity. Administration has framed these changes as a necessary framework that protects academic freedom while holding curriculum to a standard of “accountability needed to maintain excellence.” “The mission of the Texas Tech University System is to educate the next generation of Texas leaders and to drive innovation that strengthens our state and nation,” Creighton said in a public statement alongside the Dec. 1 memo. “These new guidelines reflect that mission by giving our faculty clarity, consistency and guardrails that protect academic excellence.”Faculty and students who oppose the changes say the policies have limited what professors can teach and discuss with students, possibly to an unconstitutional degree, according to a lawsuit against the university.Antonio Ingram, senior counsel of the Legal Defense Fund, said his organization filed a lawsuit July 8 on behalf of Tech professors. The plaintiffs are seeking a preliminary injunction, a motion from the court that would temporarily prevent the university from enforcing the policies while the lawsuit proceeds. “The purpose of this lawsuit is to return academic freedom to the Texas Tech system,” Ingram said. “It is to allow professors to teach based on their expertise and for students to learn about the complex and dynamic world that they will graduate into and become a part of.”Ingram said the preliminary injunctions are generally intended to suppress potential harm that cannot be remedied later in the case and believes the judge could protect students’ educational experience while the case is argued in court. The case follows months of concern from faculty about how the memorandums could affect their teaching. Andrew Martin, a tenured professor of Studio Arts at Tech, and the president of the university’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors, said the course changes challenge an educator’s authority.“Our whole path to becoming faculty depends on us demonstrating our expertise,” Martin said. “And so naturally, we believe that that’s the foundation for the decisions that are made about curriculum. I don’t want anybody’s political agenda telling me what I can or can’t teach or telling my students what they can and cannot learn.”Ingram similarly argued that the policies raise First Amendment concerns. “Viewpoint discrimination means that you allow one half of a conversation but not propose the second half of it,” Ingram said. “You cannot have a psychology course that mentions straight people but not gay people. What the Creighgton memorandum does, which is deeply unconstitutional, is muzzle half of the conversation.”Raiders Against Censorship, a student group formed after the December memorandum, has collected more than 2,500 signatures on their petition criticizing Creighton and the Board of Regents as well as calling for Creighton’s removal, according to James Snoddy, a sophomore and organizer of the group, who pointed to this number as proof of the widespread nature of the controversy. “This issue seems like a department, a specific department, a specific major issue but it affects everyone,” Snoddy said. “Protecting academic freedom should come first as a university.”Aaron Texidor, a sophomore and fellow RAC member, said he became involved after noticing the disparity between faculty fear and student knowledge. “I think what really was brought to my attention was the difference between the teachers that were afraid and not talking about this and the students who were unaware of it,” Texidor said.The group plans to continue its petition and awareness efforts during the fall semester, according to its members. Faculty continue to live in limbo, as the broader question remains: How much power do they have over their own against shifting political winds? “I think the anxiety and the fear is not about our own partisanship,” Martin said. “It’s about a vehement opposition to the idea that politicians and political agendas can determine the content of our curriculum and what we teach in our classrooms. I think we should all be opposed to that no matter what our own political preferences or thinking might be,” The university was asked for comment on the petition for Creighton’s removal but did not respond. A public statement from Creighton, however, is available regarding the lawsuit. “The Texas Tech University System is confident its policies are lawful, constitutionally sound, and fully compliant with state and federal law,” Creighton said in the statement on July 8. “Our commitment to academic integrity and the First Amendment rights of our students and faculty will not be distracted by lawsuits as we continue our mission to deliver rigorous academic programs, relevant coursework, and groundbreaking research.”</div></body>

Block Source: University Daily

Misinformation

Clickbait

Old or repetitive news

Explicit content

Location not relevant

Collectives of Texas Tech students and faculty are continuing to fight against the university’s course-content changes, pursuing legal intervention and mobilizing to have Chancellor Brandon Creighton removed from office. The debate centers on a series of memorandums published from Sept. 2025 to April 2026, which directed the Tech University...

Censorship concerns prompt backlash against Creighton

NewsBreak

Collectives of Texas Tech students and faculty are continuing to fight against the university’s course-content changes, pursuing legal intervention and mob

Censorship concerns prompt backlash against Creighton

Comments