Advanced

Oklahoma House Bill 3700

May 2026
Oklahoma Legislature (Other)
Oklahoma City, OK

Resources

Additional Information

  • Incident Nature:
    Other
  • Incident Political Orientation:
    Not Clear
  • Incident Responses:
    Other
  • Incident Status:
    No litigation
  • Was Speech Code incident

Summary

On May 5, 2026, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt signed House Bill 3700 into law, requiring public colleges and universities to ensure that grades are based on “academic performance” and objective course requirements, and not on a student’s “personal beliefs or viewpoints.” The law directs institutions to adopt policies prohibiting grading practices that evaluate students based on ideology or protected expression, and it authorizes the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education to enforce compliance, including through oversight of institutional funding.

The bill reached the governor after final legislative approval on April 29, 2026 in the Oklahoma Senate, following passage in the House on March 10, 2026. It was enrolled and transmitted to the governor on April 30, 2026. Prior legislative steps included approval by the House Postsecondary Education Committee on February 10, 2026, the House Education Oversight Committee on February 25, 2026, and Senate committee consideration on April 14, 2026. The bill was introduced on January 15, 2026, received first reading on February 2, 2026, and was referred to committee on February 3, 2026.

The legislation stemmed from a November 2025 dispute at the University of Oklahoma involving student Samantha Fulnecky, in which a psychology course assignment on societal gender roles required engagement with assigned academic material. Fulnecky submitted a 650-word essay that relied on biblical interpretation rather than course sources, arguing that God designed distinct gender roles and describing nonbinary identities as “demonic.” The graduate teaching assistant assigned a zero out of 25 points, citing failure to meet assignment criteria, lack of engagement with assigned readings, reliance on personal ideology rather than evidence, and use of language considered offensive within the classroom context. A second instructor independently reviewed the submission and reached the same conclusion regarding noncompliance with assignment requirements. Fulnecky subsequently filed a formal complaint alleging religious discrimination, and the resulting dispute was treated by policymakers and media as a broader controversy over whether students may be graded based on the extent to which their work reflects or conflicts with their personal beliefs.