Austin, TX
July 24, 2026
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Lauren Gutterman, ljg300@gmail.com
Julie Minich, julieminich@yahoo.com
AAUP Chapter at UT Austin Warns of Academic Freedom Violation in the Case of Border Technology Scholar, Calls for Reversal of Tenure Denial
The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) Chapter at the University of Texas at Austin is deeply concerned about potential academic freedom and due process violations in the case of Dr. Iván Chaar López, an Assistant Professor of American Studies who was denied tenure by President Jim Davis this spring. Dr. Chaar López reached out to the AAUP as a result of receiving a letter on May 14th stating that the University’s decision in his tenure case was final while failing to provide a justification for the decision.
Dr. Chaar López’s promotion case was supported unanimously by seven senior scholars in his home department and by eight leading scholars outside UT in the fields of American Studies, Latinx Studies, and Science and Technology Studies, including a MacArthur Fellowship or “genius grant” winner. His promotion was also supported by the College of Liberal Arts (COLA) Promotion and Tenure Committee, and by COLA Interim Dean David Sosa. His promotion was first denied by the President and Provost’s committee on Promotion and Tenure without explanation in February, and Dr. Chaar López’s appeal was denied by President Jim Davis in May.
In June, Michael DeCesare, AAUP Senior Program Officer in the Department of Academic Freedom, Tenure, and Governance, wrote to UT Austin’s leaders urging them to provide Dr. Chaar López with reasons for the decision against granting him tenure, which the University has thus far failed to provide. UT’s leaders have not yet responded to DeCesare.
As the AAUP’s Statement on Procedural Standards in the Renewal or Nonrenewal of Faculty Appointments notes, in the event of a decision not to renew an appointment, probationary faculty members are entitled to notices of the reasons for the decision upon request; otherwise, a faculty member may conclude the decision is based on improper motivations or inadequate consideration.
This past February, President Jim Davis announced that the University would be closing the American Studies Department along with six other departments focused on racial, ethnic, gender, sexuality, and area studies. “The President’s decision in Dr. Chaar López’s case cannot be understood apart from his decision to shutter the American Studies and Mexican American and Latina/o Studies departments,” said Karma Chávez, President of the AAUP Chapter at UT Austin. “It appears the University is trying to silence teaching and research in these fields.”
Based on his nearly two decades of evaluating candidates for tenure and promotion at Research 1 institutions across the country, David Vázquez, president of the Latinx Studies Association, is confounded by UT’s decision to deny tenure to Dr. Chaar López. “Not only is it a black mark on UT Austin to reject such an accomplished and dedicated young scholar, but it is also a clear indication that UT Austin is motivated more by political concerns than research excellence,” Vázquez says.
Alex Lubin, Immediate Past-President of the American Studies Association, has urged UT’s leaders to reconsider Dr. Chaar López’s case: “The Department, the College, and external review experts have all judged Dr. Chaar López’s scholarship to be of the highest level. I hope you will reconsider your decision to deny Dr. Chaar López’s promotion and tenure. Doing so would restore some trust in UT’s commitment to academic freedom and its commitment to nationally recognized norms of faculty tenure reviews.”
Responding to a journalist’s inquiry about Dr. Chaar López’s case this week, an unnamed spokesperson for the university stated that “tenure is a privilege, not a right.” They added, “UT does not rubber stamp decisions of such importance. The tenure review process is handled thoughtfully, fairly, and professionally with a thorough system of checks and balances.”
Tenure is not a “privilege.” It is the foundational cornerstone of any serious university’s research enterprise. Tenure ensures the freedom of faculty to research and teach without fear of political reprisal and ensures the right of students to learn in an atmosphere of unfettered freedom of inquiry.
In a modern research university, tenure is an earned right: a meticulously delineated labor contract between the university and faculty. The bar is intentionally set high: the terms and obligations are exacting and are clearly laid out when a faculty member is hired on the tenure track, and the procedures for ensuring the rigor and fairness of the process have been time-tested for well over a century in every great research institution in the land.
Framing tenure as a “privilege” to be dispensed or revoked at the whim of politically-motivated actors strips it bare of its purpose and transforms it into an instrument of coercive control.
Given the preponderance of affirmative evidence, AAUP at UT calls on Jim Davis to reverse this decision and award Dr. Chaar López the tenure and promotion to Associate Professor that he has earned.
Our chapter also insists on the following information and assurances from UT Austin’s administration:
- If UT leaders’ evaluation of Dr. Chaar López’s case was as thorough as they claim, they must provide a detailed explanation of the tenure decision.
- Texas has permissive open records laws and all other parts of promotion cases are public. UT Austin’s president’s committee must therefore provide open access to meeting notes and the chain of decision-making in Dr. Chaar López’s case.
- UT Austin must provide prospective faculty assurances that six years of probation on the tenure track and a rigorous process of internal and external expert review will not result in summary dismissal without explanation.Without such assurances, why would top-tier faculty consider UT Austin for future employment?
- UT Austin must affirm that its rules of tenure are not subject to politically-based manipulation so students can be assured their faculty are not teaching in an atmosphere of fear of reprisal, and parents can be assured that their students are receiving a first-class education at UT Austin and not simply being taught the “party line” according to whatever political force dominates the legislature or sits in the governor’s office.
The assurance of a tenure process free from political manipulation is the very thing that launched the United States’ ascendance as a global research powerhouse. UT Austin’s historically rigorous and transparent adherence to these norms has propelled its rise to its current position as one of the top public research institutions in the nation.
In 1876, Article VII section 10 of the Texas Constitution enjoined the foundation of “a university of the first class.” With this decision, UT Austin’s administration has violated that constitutional mandate and risks a future in which the University of Texas at Austin is viewed as a politically manipulated enterprise unable to guarantee its faculty the freedom to research and to teach generations of future Texans.
###