What the UT System’s drag ban means for UTD

On March 18, the UT System Board of Regents announced that drag shows would no longer be allowed on University of Texas campuses, including UTD. 

The board did not define what a drag show is; however, it said that the policy intends to fall in line with President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14168, which prohibits public funds from being used to “promote gender ideology.” On March 28, the UNT System Board of Regents adopted a similar policy. 

The ban comes after the Texas A&M System Board of Regents banned drag shows on its campuses Feb. 28, the first drag-specific prohibition in Texas higher education. After A&M System’s ban, Tarrant County Judge Tim O’Hare published an open letter encouraging a similar ban within the UT System. The A&M System ban was challenged to a federal district court, where senior district judge Lee Rosenthal found the ordinance unconstitutional, as it violates free speech protects guaranteed under the First Amendment. 

“The ban is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech,” Rosenthal wrote in his judicial opinion. “The ban on drag shows is a viewpoint-based restriction on speech and expressive conduct.” 

Following the court’s temporary block, Texas A&M University hosted Draggieland, an adults-only annual drag performance, on March 27. UT System’s drag ban has yet to be contested in a courtroom; however, with its many similarities to A&M’s ban, it appears to raise similar constitutional questions. 

“No restrictions can be placed on ideological content or viewpoint expressed, and, to me, that absolutely includes drag,” Caden Brenner, sociology junior and UTD Student Government’s Diversity, Equity and Belonging Committee chair, said. “[It is] proof that the state government cares a lot less about your constitutional rights than their own political agenda.” 

Brenner has led advocacy against the ban within Student Government, authoring SR 2025-08, a resolution calling the ban “a gross political overreach” and encouraging university actors to be “minimally compliant” with the policy. It further highlights that UTD, despite claims otherwise, does not fund any drag performances on campus. 

In the 2024-25 academic year, there have been five drag events at UTD. XAI and other organizations use the shows as an opportunity for fundraising. For some, however, these events provide something more intangible than funds: comfort and community.  

“It was just a place for these people to show off their costume making skills,” Owen Johnson, computer science junior and president of UTD PRIDE, said. “It’s something people like to put a ton of effort and creativity into. It’s just kind of sad that UTD is not only not here to help us but it’s also actively working against us.” 

At the most recent Academic Senate meeting, administrators shared their decision to revoke UTDPP1115, the current policy regarding how the university approaches students’ preferred names and pronouns. The policy states, for example, that “university communications and reporting” will use a student’s preferred name, gender identity and pronouns and faculty members are required to use students’ preferred names. Administrators cited concerns that parts of the policy may be in violation of 2023 Texas Senate Bill 17, which called for strict yet unclear guidelines on higher education. UTD administrators said the policy was in violation because it included the words “diversity”, “equity” and “inclusion”. Instead of reforming the policy internally and submitting a revision, Michael Kesden, physics professor and speaker of the Academic Senate, said university attorney Tim Shaw recommended UTD temporarily revoke UTDPP1115 in its entirety. 

“What is currently being carried out by the registrar’s office is not actually in violation of SB 17,” Brenner said. “There didn’t seem to be an adequate explanation for why the policy had to come down if only a couple words here and there that weren’t actually operant in regard to the policy’s main functioning.” 

The Office of Legal Affairs’ move may serve to satisfy the UT Board of Regents and the Texas legislature, both of which are calling for the removal of various “gender ideologies” from state institutions. It remains unclear, though, how the policy’s removal will affect students on a day-to-day basis. Many students at UTD have non-English names and often choose to go by a different name for simplicity. Others simply prefer to use a nickname with professors, yet without an official policy, the decision to collect preferred names will fall on individual administrators in the registrar’s office. Kesden said the university could continue to provide the resources established by UTDPP1115, there just would not be an associated written policy to support it. The Retrograde reached out to Shaw in the Office of Legal Affairs, who declined to comment. 

“[We are] under the assumption that the registrar’s office will maintain the functional policy while it’s being revised over concerns that it violates SB 17,” Brenner said. “When we want protections for our students, having them codified in our handbooks is an important first step to making sure that we have them consistently.” 

Even with students expressing concerns, there are few measures that students or school communities can take to influence the UT System Board of Regents. The board, consisting of nine members and one student regent, is appointed by Gov. Greg Abbott; the current board members have contributed more than $5.8 million to Abbott’s political campaigns. The board has historically been mired in controversy, with past appointees connected to widespread corruption, schemes of disallowed campaign contributions and whistleblower complaints of admission on the basis of wealthy influence rather than merit.  

Despite those controversies, stricter regulations in favor of the board have surfaced in Texas’ legislature. Texas Sen. Brandon Creighton recently authored Senate Bill 37, legislation that would greatly expand the board’s power by allowing them to directly vet professors’ curriculum and university hiring decisions. The bill would also disallow university endorsement of any public policy or ideology, possibly making it illegal for professors to support values like democracy, free speech or the right to vote. 

In his public testimony, Brian Evans, president of Texas’ chapter of the American Association of University Professors, said, “If anything is radical here, it is SB 37, which would take curriculum out of the hands of the subject matter experts … It would be a death knell for Texas’ standing as a top-tier education and research destination.” 

As of publication, no policy has been introduced at UTD that specifically addresses the system drag ban.