Texas A&M's LGBTQ Studies minor and 4-H club targeted by Republican lawmakers

PEN America has expressed significant concern and raised the alarm over political pressures being exerted on Texas A&M University’s curriculum, explicitly targeting the inclusion of what critics call critical race theory in its 4-H program and the existence of an LGBTQ Studies minor. This development follows critical statements from Texas U.S. Representative Chip Roy and State Representative Brian Harrison, both Republicans, who have accused the university of promoting divisive ideologies and “liberal indoctrination” through its educational content.

Roy’s objections were laid out in a detailed letter addressed to Montza Williams, the 4-H program director for the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service, where he criticized a specific 4-H program lesson on “Power and Privilege – What Does it Get You?” for allegedly advancing critical race theory principles by encouraging students to examine their immutable characteristics and their societal implications. Roy argued that such lessons contradict the foundational values of the United States and undermine the mission of developing productive citizens.

Further intensifying the debate, Harrison aired his grievances on social media, lambasting Texas A&M for spending state resources on what he views as controversial teachings related to gender, sexuality, and their connections to broader issues of discrimination.

"After discussions with [Texas A&M University] leadership, they just confirmed that Texas A&M is spending state resources to assert that ‘gender and sexuality are socially constructed,’ that ‘transphobia’ has a ‘relationship to racism, colonialism, sexism, ableism, classism,’ and that they plan to continue spending tax dollars to maintain their undergraduate minor in LGBTQ studies,” Harrison wrote on X (formerly Twitter) on February 15. “Outrageous. Hard-working, over-taxed Texans should not be forced to pay for liberal indoctrination, and I will be exploring legislative remedies,” he continued.

In a press release, Jeremy C. Young, director of the Freedom to Learn program at PEN America, responded to these political interventions, warning of their chilling effect on academic freedom and open inquiry on campus. Young emphasized that universities must be havens for diverse ideas and debates and that legislative threats to specific courses or programs threaten the core mission of higher education.

“This level of ideological meddling into the affairs of a university by politicians is frightening,” he wrote. “Legislators are likely to cast a chilling effect on campus when they demand specific courses be dropped and threaten legislative action against a course of study. And for a state lawmaker to propose a law that would censor one specific academic discipline is a violation of the very essence of academic freedom. Universities are places where all ideas must be welcome and open for debate. If you ban some ideas from the classroom, you would no longer have a university at all.”