A Professor at the University of Alabama Claims a Strong State Official Threatened Program Funding Due to DEI Content
A professor at the University of Alabama has claimed that a prominent state lawmaker threatened to cut funding for her academic program unless it was aligned with the state's contentious ban on DEI programs and so-called "divisive concepts," which is at the center of an increasingly heated legal and cultural dispute in Alabama.
@ClaudiasWorkshop 
At a federal court hearing on Wednesday, Dr. Dana Patton, a professor of political science and director of the Witt Fellows Program, testified that she had received warnings that a “very powerful person in Montgomery” was exerting pressure on her program, which emphasizes community service and interdisciplinary honors education.
Her statement was part of an evidence hearing in a lawsuit against Senate Bill 129, a newly passed law that restricts classroom topics of race, gender, and identity that the state deems “divisive” and prohibits state funding for diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
An intimidating atmosphere
Patton described how anonymous complaints, sent in October 2024, accused her course of incorporating "divisive themes" and asserted that students felt "scared to speak" and silenced. She was appearing before U.S. District Judge R. David Proctor. According to the allegations, her course materials shut off opposing viewpoints while endorsing one worldview as true.
However, the subsequent incident—an unannounced 45-minute chat with Rep. Danny Garrett, R-Trussville, at a University of Alabama football game—bothered Patton more than the anonymous criticism. Garrett brought up the complaints and said that Rep. Susan DuBose, R-Hoover, was adamant about pursuing the issue. Garrett is the chair of the House Ways and Means Education Committee, which is the legislative body that controls the budget for Alabama's Education Trust Fund.
Patton testified, "He told me he controls the budget." That my initiative had angered the legislature, and that going forward, we needed to steer clear of "big concerns." I interpreted that as a serious threat.
When Budget Discussion Turns Into a Warning
Text exchanges shown in court revealed that Garrett followed up with Patton following the November game, offering to arrange a meeting with university officials and other lawmakers. His professed goal? for the purpose of "addressing/resolving concerns and avoiding potential major issues in the future."
However, that language seemed coercive to Patton rather than collaborative.
"The inference is rather apparent when someone in charge of the education budget tells you that your course is a problem and that he wants to settle problems before they become a major issue,'" she stated in court. "I felt as though I had to decide between preserving my program's funding and upholding academic integrity."
The Depressing Impact of an Unclear Law
The larger case against SB 129, which was filed in January, contends that the law targets DEI-related activities with ambiguous, politically charged language and muzzle expression, in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Plaintiffs claim that because the regulation is so vague, administrators and teachers are forced to self-censor in order to stay out of trouble.
In response to the criticism, Patton has already modified her program, eliminating the Harvard Implicit Association Test (IAT), which gauges unconscious bias. She was afraid that its inclusion might lead to more complaints, even though no one specifically instructed her to take it down.
"I can not control how my pupils feel about the IAT, but I remind them it does not imply they are racist or sexist," Patton added.
Silence and a Declining Dialogue Space
The University of Alabama Board of Trustees' lawyers did not contest Patton's assertions or request clarification during cross-examination. After the session, lawyer Jay Ezelle said he did not want to take the chance of disclosing the identities of the students who filed the anonymous complaints, so he refrained from commenting on either topic.
As it stands, the consequences of this case could change academic freedom in Alabama and perhaps elsewhere in the future. What happens when teachers worry that every lesson plan could jeopardize their employment or funding?
As of right present, Dr. Dana Patton is still teaching, but with caution. She is among the first to openly express the conflict that many faculty members today experience as a result of SB 129: being torn between the principles of education and the more politicized halls of power.
