The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, offers a case study in what can go wrong when external pressure collides with internal process. 

The trouble began in summer 2025, when McCoul taught a course exploring themes of gender identity and sexual orientation in children’s literature—topics she maintains were consistent with the syllabus and approved course objectives. A student posted a slide from class to social media. The post went viral. Politicians weighed in. Abbott’s post demanding her termination drew 2.2 million views. 

According to the lawsuit, the university moved fast. McCoul was dismissed that same day. There was no notice of intent. No written charges. No opportunity to respond. When Provost Alan Sams was later asked why no hearing took place beforehand, he allegedly replied: “I was told not to do a hearing by my superiors.” 

What followed made the situation more striking. McCoul exercised her right to appeal, and the university’s Committee on Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure held a full-day hearing in November. The eight-member panel reviewed documents and heard testimony from university officials. Its conclusion was unanimous: the university had not met its burden of proof on any of the three grounds cited to justify the termination. 

The committee noted that multiple university witnesses acknowledged proper procedures had not been followed. It found no documentary evidence that an investigation had been conducted, and no evidence that directives had been clearly communicated to McCoul.Â