In recent days, Texas Tech University has come under fire by free speech advocates over its decision to cancel programs — and a first amendment lawsuit filed by a student after she was disciplined in the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s death.
The university system will shutter its programs focusing on gender identity and sexuality, according to a memo released on April 9 by Chancellor Brandon Creighton and first reported by the Texas Tribune.
The memo said that both the university policy and state law mandate only two sexes be recognized, and that currently enrolled students in any affected program would be able to finish their degree, but the university system would be otherwise phasing them out.
According to the Tribune, Creighton said in a statement that he is focused on “ensuring our academic programs are rigorous, relevant, and produce degrees of value.”
“That focus is matched by our unwavering support for the First Amendment and the open exchange of ideas that define a public university,” Creighton continued.
Students and faculty have expressed disappointment and surprise at the decision. Jen Shelton, an associate professor of English, has taught at Texas Tech for 25 years, and told the Texas Tribune that the university’s provost had assured faculty their research would not be impacted.
“I think the whole university has been betrayed. I think even the provost did not expect it to look like this,” Shelton said to the Texas Tribune.
Andrew Martin, president of the Texas Tech chapter of the American Association of University Professors, released a statement on April 10 about Creighton’s memo and its impact on the education of Texas Tech students.
“The policy handed down in today’s memo is shocking in its brazen disregard for our commitment to delivering a meaningful, complete, and truthful education, and finally demonstrates the true agenda: The accusations of ‘indoctrination’ were nothing but an excuse to inflict a preferred indoctrination,” Martin said in the statement.
Brian Evans, president of the Texas AAUP, also made a statement condemning the change as detrimental to the job prospects of Texas Tech students.
“These programs teach students the reality of the world around them, making them better prepared for careers in everything from healthcare and education to understanding consumers at big corporate jobs,” Evans said. “This decision from a politician-turned-higher-education-administrator shortchanges Texas Tech students and hangs them out to dry in the job market.”
Also this week, on April 12, a law student sued the university for reprimanding her over comments made after the death of conservative activist Charlie Kirk in September 2025.
According to the lawsuit, the student, Ellie Fisher, was investigated for “unprofessional conduct” after discussing Kirk’s death in class and with law school faculty and other students. Fisher was the only student scrutinized for her discussion of the events, the lawsuit said, despite many other students engaging in the topic.
The lawsuit described the killing of Kirk, who was shot during a speaking event at a university in Utah, as an “assault” on freedoms afforded by the First Amendment — which was then used by Texas Tech’s faculty to inflict “more rather than less viewpoint suppression,” the suit claims.
Fisher was found in violation of Texas Tech Law School’s honor code after the investigation found her discussion of Kirk’s death to be “loud, happy and celebratory,” the Texas Tribune reported. Fisher was given a reprimand that will appear on her school record. The lawsuit alleges that the disciplinary action and investigation wrongfully singled out Fisher.
Garrett Gravley, a campus rights advocate for free speech advocacy organization FIRE, told the student newspaper The Daily Toreador after Fisher was found guilty of misconduct that the decision violated her First Amendment rights.
“This decision was a miscarriage of justice. It was very offensive to the First Amendment and to free speech values,” Gravely said to the Toreador.
Antonio Ingram, counsel at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, told the Texas Tribune that Texas Tech’s move to end education centered on gender identity and sexual orientation could potentially amount to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination, and appeared politically motivated.
“I think in many ways, this is a doubling down on a political project that is not meant to help students. It is really meant to uphold a political worldview,” Ingram said to the Texas Tribune.
