Texas Senate Bill SB 2946

Texas 2025 - 89th Regular

• Filed: 3/14/25

Caption

Relating to prohibiting public institutions of higher education from offering programs or courses in DEI studies.

Summary

SB 2946 would prohibit Texas public institutions of higher education from offering certificate or degree programs, including majors and minors, or individual courses in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) studies. The bill defines the prohibition broadly to include DEI content and, specifically, programs or courses that promote differential treatment of individuals based on race, color, or ethnicity. It applies to public institutions of higher education as defined in the Education Code and would begin with the 2026-2027 academic year. The bill also creates enforcement mechanisms. The Texas State Auditor would conduct annual compliance audits of each institution to determine whether state money was spent in violation of the prohibition. If an institution is found to have spent money in violation, it would be barred from receiving state funding until it comes into compliance. Students required to participate in a prohibited program or course could sue the institution for injunctive or declaratory relief. Institutions would also be required to discipline employees found to have violated the section, including unpaid leave for a first violation and discharge for a second or subsequent violation, and report those actions to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, which would maintain a list of affected employees and restrict rehiring for a period of time.

Impact

SB 2946 would amend Chapter 51 of the Texas Education Code by adding a new section restricting what public colleges and universities may offer in DEI-related instruction and degree pathways. It would also expand the role of the State Auditor and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board in monitoring compliance, and it would create new consequences for institutions, employees, and potentially state funding. The bill would directly affect public institutions of higher education, faculty and staff involved in DEI-related teaching, and students enrolled or required to enroll in such programs or courses.

Sentiment

Based on the bill caption and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the available context suggests the bill was introduced as part of a broader effort to limit DEI programming in public higher education. The bill’s structure indicates strong support from proponents of restricting DEI instruction and administrative spending, while also signaling likely concern from higher education stakeholders about academic freedom, curriculum control, and administrative burdens. No formal vote history or transcript record is provided here to show the balance of support and opposition.

Contention

The main points of contention are likely to be whether DEI studies should be treated as prohibited subject matter in public universities, whether the bill intrudes on academic freedom and institutional autonomy, and whether the enforcement scheme is too punitive. Potential opponents would include universities, faculty, and students who view DEI as a legitimate academic or training area, while supporters would likely argue that public funds should not support what they see as ideological instruction or differential treatment based on race or ethnicity. The bill’s audit, funding cutoff, employee discipline, and rehiring restrictions are additional flashpoints because they create significant compliance and employment consequences.