New Virginia law would target politics in university governance after turbulent year at UVA

In a bid to depoliticize the way Virginia’s public universities are governed, state lawmakers in March approved legislation that would reshape the board appointment process and prohibit policies that restrict academic freedom.

The action follows a tumultuous year at UVA. The university found itself at the center of a federal pressure campaign that culminated in the ouster of President Jim Ryan (Law class of ’92), who later suggested that members of the Board of Visitors appointed by Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin had forced him out under threat of losing millions in federal research funding.

In January, newly elected Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger (Col class of ’01) moved quickly to reshape the 17-member BOV, replacing five members and filling five vacancies left after a Senate committee declined to confirm several of Youngkin’s nominees. She also pledged to work with lawmakers to ensure that no future governor could impose an “ideological agenda” on Virginia’s public universities.

“Virginia has some of the finest colleges and universities in the world,” Spanberger said in a Jan. 19 address to the General Assembly. “And yet, news story after news story isn’t about their successes—it’s about them becoming political battlegrounds. This ends right now.”

The compromise legislation arrived on Spanberger’s desk as two identical bills—HB1385, sponsored by Del. Lily Franklin, D-Montgomery, and SB494 authored by Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, D-Charlottesville. The legislation would replace two consecutive four-year board terms with a single six-year term, followed by a mandatory two-year break before reappointment—effectively preventing any governor from naming an entire board during a single term.

Appointees would be allowed to attend board meetings once approved by House and Senate committees on Privileges and Elections but could not vote until confirmed by the full General Assembly. Committee rejections would be final. The new rules would only apply to future appointees and would be phased in on a staggered schedule, with full implementation by 2034.

If signed by Spanberger, the new law would go into effect July 1. The governor could also amend or veto the bill, sending it back to the General Assembly for consideration when lawmakers are set to reconvene on April 22.

University board appointments have long been political, with governors selecting members and the General Assembly confirming them. But the process has rarely made headlines.

That shifted last summer when partisan conflict erupted over some of Youngkin’s nominees, including former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (Engr class of ’91). Democrats on the Senate Committee on Privileges and Elections blocked his appointment and 21 others in a year, leaving several universities with vacancies. Youngkin instructed his nominees to begin serving anyway, prompting a legal battle he ultimately lost.

“I think the last year has really illuminated for us some of the weaknesses in our board governance structure that really make us ripe for federal targeting, federal overreach and politicization of our state schools,” Del. Katrina Callsen (Law class of ’14), a Democrat from Charlottesville who helped hammer out the proposed law, told the nonprofit news outlet Charlottesville Tomorrow in February.

The legislation would also expand board representation and reinforce academic independence.

It would add a nonvoting staff member, to be elected by the Staff Senate, and gives the Faculty Senate authority to elect its own nonvoting representative. Both positions would become mandatory.

“Right now the board may have a representative,” said Faculty Senate Chair Jeri Seidman, an associate professor in the McIntire School, speaking for herself. “This would change that to shall. It changes what it means to be in the room. You can share opinions without fear of removal.”

The bill would further bar governing boards from adopting policies that censor expression based on viewpoint or partisan objectives and prohibit disciplinary action against faculty for exercising academic freedom. Seidman said increasing cases of campus censorship and firings in some states, such as Texas and Oklahoma, have had faculty on edge.

“I think this helps relieve anxieties dramatically for (faculty members) here now and those considering coming here,” she said.

Finally, higher education governing boards would be required to adopt annual ethics codes addressing political activity and conflicts of interest, and consult faculty senates on major academic decisions, including program eliminations and tenure.

At UVA, the Faculty Senate has criticized efforts by Trump and the Youngkin-appointed board to dismantle DEI efforts. Last March, it passed a resolution defending academic freedom, warning that the federal directives threatened to impose restrictions on what was being taught in classrooms or researched in labs.

Left unresolved by the bill is whether Virginia colleges and universities can hire independent legal counsel. Currently all universities are represented by lawyers who report to the state’s attorney general, an elected position. The proposed law directs the AG and the State Council of Higher Education to convene a work group to study the issue.

In 2022, UVA’s top lawyer, Tim Heaphy (Col class of ’86, Law class of ’91), was fired by incoming Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares while on leave serving as lead investigator for the U.S. House panel examining the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. A Miyares spokesperson told The Washington Post at the time that incoming attorneys general often appoint counsel aligned with their “philosophy and legal approach.”

Franklin said the legislation’s key sponsors, working with Spanberger, Secretary of Education Jeffery Smith and Attorney General Jay Jones, realized there were complex financial and legal considerations that needed to be hashed out before changing the law.

“There were just a lot more players and a lot more things at stake that needed to be discussed in a work group versus … a 60-day legislative session,” she said.