Academic Freedom: Protecting the Integrity of the Degree
Academic freedom is not an abstraction in my house—we’ve built our lives around it.
My husband is a professor. We moved our family to Texas A&M after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina because we believed in this community and because Texas A&M does good science—rigorous, respected, and consequential science. The kind of science that matters when a hurricane is bearing down on the Gulf Coast.
But that integrity is under attack.
Senate Bill 37 (SB 37) is a primary reason why I am running this cycle. Sponsored by Charles Schwertner and pushed by Dan Patrick on behalf of billionaire backers, Paul Dyson voted for this legislation which allows political appointees to dictate what is taught in our classrooms. When the Board of Regents excludes climate change, race, gender, and ethnicity from the core curriculum, they aren't "cleaning up" education—they are telling our professors which science is permitted.
Case Study: The A&M Core Curriculum Cuts - an examination of how SB 37 and political pressure are reshaping higher education in HD14Read my full analysis: It’s Not Political—It’s Just What the Politicians Want. I dive deep into how donor influence and political pressure led to the removal of 100+ courses from the A&M core curriculum,
This is more than a political disagreement; it is an institutional risk.
On August 20, 2026, a proposed federal rule landed in the Federal Register. I read all 82 pages of it, and what
A Federal Register proposed Rule would shield state laws like SB 37I found was alarming. The rule threatens to allow political capture of the accreditation process.
Why this matters to every student at A&M: If the federal government allows political agendas to replace academic standards, we risk the very accreditation that gives your degree its value. Without accreditation, federal funding vanishes and the prestige of your degree is diminished.
I am running to ensure that Texas A&M remains a place of rigorous inquiry, not political compliance.
In a district with 80,000 college students, academic freedom matters.
Bryan-College-Station deserves leadership that respects learning, open inquiry, and the independence of our public institutions.
SB 37 shifts control of public universities to political appointees, sidelines faculty, and invites political interference into the core curriculum.
That is a direct threat to academic freedom.
What academic freedom means
Academic freedom is more than a slogan.
It is the freedom to ask hard questions, follow evidence where it leads, and explore ideas without political interference or fear of punishment.
It protects both students and faculty.
Without it, education becomes narrower, weaker, and more vulnerable to ideology.
With it, colleges and universities remain places where knowledge grows.
Academic freedom begins with courage
It takes courage to teach difficult material in good faith.
It takes courage to challenge assumptions in pursuit of truth.
And it takes courage to let students wrestle with ideas that are complex, controversial, or uncomfortable.
When academic freedom is protected:
disagreement does not become punishment
discussion does not become intimidation
criticism does not become censorship
That is how real learning happens.
Why this matters beyond campus
Academic freedom does not serve only universities.
It serves the public.
Our colleges and universities train doctors, engineers, teachers, researchers, nurses, and public servants. They do their best work when inquiry is guided by evidence and expertise — not by political pressure.
Every major breakthrough begins with the freedom to ask: What if we are wrong?
Every strong democracy depends on the freedom to say: The truth cannot be voted on.
Standards matter
Academic freedom is not a free pass for carelessness.
It comes with standards.
Faculty should be able to teach, research, and speak honestly — while remaining accountable to evidence, rigor, and professional responsibility.
Students should be able to question ideas, debate openly, and think critically — without being silenced or punished for good-faith inquiry.
The goal is not to avoid disagreement.
The goal is to make disagreement part of learning.
What happens when freedom disappears
When people believe disagreement will cost them opportunities, reputation, or belonging, they begin to self-censor.
That is one of the greatest threats to a university.
The safest questions replace the best ones.
The most important conversations never happen.
And a campus that cannot tolerate intellectual risk stops growing.
A campus without academic freedom does not just lose arguments. It loses the future.
What Janet Dudding believes
Janet Dudding believes:
public universities should be places of learning, inquiry, and opportunity
faculty expertise should be respected, not pushed aside
students should be free to learn without political interference
strong institutions require transparency, due process, and intellectual independence
In a community shaped by students, educators, and one of the nation’s leading public universities, academic freedom is not optional.
It is essential.
The receipt
Read the receipt: SB 37 — Governance of public institutions of higher education
Federal funding risk
Attacks on academic freedom can also create institutional risk.
Under 34 CFR 75.500(b)(1), academic freedom is expressly recognized as part of First Amendment compliance and a material condition of federal grants to public colleges and universities.
That means undermining academic freedom is not just bad policy.
It can also put federal funding at risk.
Why This Matters for Texans
Academic freedom isn't just about the classroom—it's about our economy and our safety. From rising insurance costs to disaster resilience, we cannot solve Texas's problems if we censor the facts. Read more about the connection between climate study and insurance costs on my Substack.