Courts and Higher Education

Texas A&M has moved to end its Women’s and Gender Studies degree program, and the university is facing a federal lawsuit after senior English lecturer Melissa McCoul was fired following a viral July 2025 classroom video of a student objecting to a children’s literature discussion of gender identity. McCoul’s Houston lawsuit alleges her firing violated her First Amendment and due‑process rights, notes that two internal review bodies found she was denied due process and that there was no cause for termination (despite the administration upholding the firing), and names former president Mark Welsh (who resigned), interim president Tommy Williams, Chancellor Glenn Hegar and the Texas A&M System Board of Regents as defendants while seeking reinstatement and damages; the episode prompted public calls for her ouster from Gov. Greg Abbott and other Republicans.

Texas A&M senior English lecturer Melissa McCoul has filed a federal lawsuit in Houston alleging the university violated her First Amendment and due‑process rights when it fired her last year after a viral classroom video showed a student objecting to a children’s literature lesson about gender identity under President Donald Trump’s executive order. McCoul’s July 2025 lesson became a political flashpoint after Gov. Greg Abbott and other Republicans publicly demanded her termination, and she was dismissed even though two separate internal A&M review bodies later concluded the university had denied her due process and lacked cause to fire her. The suit names as defendants former Texas A&M president Mark Welsh, who resigned amid the controversy, interim president Tommy Williams, system chancellor Glenn Hegar and the Board of Regents, and it seeks reinstatement plus monetary damages. McCoul insists her syllabus was "100 percent aligned" with the course catalog and says she was punished for exploring themes derided as "liberal" or "woke," while the university, which just announced the elimination of its women’s and gender studies degrees and broad syllabus changes under a new law limiting race and gender instruction, says it will "vigorously defend" against her claims. The case now becomes a key early test of how far state officials and governing boards can go in enforcing new ideological limits in college classrooms before colliding with faculty speech protections in federal court.