Advanced

University of Texas at Austin – Graduate Student Assembly

October 2025
University of Texas at Austin (Public college or university)
Austin, TX

Identity of Speakers

  • Graduate Student Assembly at UT Austin
    Student
    Other

    The official representative body for graduate students at the University of Texas at Austin

Resources

Additional Information

  • Incident Nature:
    Recognized student group event
    Other
  • Incident Political Orientation:
    Not Clear
  • Incident Responses:
    University administration invoked formal speech code in response
    State Campus Free Speech Act
    Title IX or other federal statute
  • Incident Status:
    No litigation
  • Was Speech Code incident

Summary

On October 10, 2025, Graduate Student Assembly (GSA) President David Spicer submitted two proposed resolutions to Associate Dean for Graduate Studies Christopher J. McCarthy, as required by the assembly’s bylaws. One resolution condemned Texas Senate Bill 17, which bans diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives at public institutions in Texas, and the other opposed Texas Senate Bill 37, which put faculty senates under the control of university presidents and boards.

On October 15, 2025, the dean’s office informed the GSA that the resolutions could not be considered by the assembly. The office stated that the proposals constituted political speech that a sponsored student organization could not issue in its official capacity under the university’s institutional neutrality policy.

The GSA questioned the decision and pointed to a recent statement issued by the undergraduate student government in support of the university president, noting that it appeared to involve a public matter. University officials responded that the undergraduate statement was not considered political speech because it involved a non-elected official.

On October 30, 2025, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and the ACLU of Texas wrote to the university, asserting that the neutrality policy was being applied in a way that prevented the GSA from fulfilling its role of representing graduate student views on campus and state policy. The letter argued that the restriction limited student expression and undermined the purpose of the neutrality policy.