An undercover probe found Texas State University in San Marcos continuing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion work despite SB 17, with staff admitting they rebranded materials and relied on administrative backing to keep courses and offices functioning.
Accuracy in Media conducted an undercover investigation that recorded university employees describing how DEI activity has persisted at Texas State University even after state law. The probe focused on staff behavior and internal explanations for how the campus navigates the 2024 restrictions.
Dr. Gloria Martinez-Ramos was recorded discussing how the school has effectively sidestepped the statute that, in Texas’ words, prohibited public institutions from establishing or maintaining DEI offices or staff, or designated DEI-rated duties to staffers. She framed the work as academic and suggested that label changes and administrative discretion have kept programs alive on campus.
Martinez-Ramos specifically told the investigator that the university’s leadership has been sympathetic. She claimed President Kelley Damphouse has “supported our efforts,” and she referenced his prior role as director of women’s studies at the University of Oklahoma as evidence of his ideological leanings.
“The law does not apply to academics,” Martinez-Ramos told the undercover investigator. “The courses are still on…we’re still here. That’s why we have the office here.” Those lines came directly during the conversation and were presented as justification for maintaining DEI-related activities under an academic banner.
She also said, “I really believe that President Damphouse is supporting us,” Martinez-Ramos continued. “But nobody wants to make it public because then people will come down on him.” The remarks suggest an awareness that public exposure could trigger political or administrative backlash.
At one point Martinez-Ramos admitted they altered “a little of the language” to keep things moving while avoiding explicit violations. That admission reveals a deliberate effort to reshape paperwork and messaging rather than stop the underlying programs.
Martinez-Ramos spelled out the most practical adjustment they made: “The thing we did change is that we had to remove the diversity statements,” Martinez-Ramos confided. “But instead of having a statement…I tell faculty ‘put it in your syllabus’…but you don’t call it ‘diversity statement,’ you call it your ‘teaching philosophy.’”
When the investigator pushed on whether that was just a surface fix, the exchange was blunt: “So they do something that’s a quick quote unquote fix, but it’s not changing much?” the investigator asked. “Exactly,” Martinez-Ramos responded.
The account underscores how campus insiders describe adapting to SB 17, a law that has been in effect since 2024 and bars public universities from creating or maintaining DEI offices or dedicating staff duties specifically to DEI. The recordings raise questions about enforcement, transparency, and whether administrative rebranding meets the law’s intent.
