![\"Sajida](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Screenshot-2026-04-09-at-11.27.01-AM.png\")
Sajida Jalalzai alleges Trinity University denied her tenure based on discrimination. Credit: Tess Gagliano<\/p>\nSajida Jalalzai alleges Trinity University denied her tenure based on discrimination. Credit: Tess Gagliano<\/p>\n
This story originally ran in the Trinitonian<\/a>, Trinity University\u2019s student-run newspaper. You can read other Trinitonian content or support the publication at trinitonian.com.<\/p>\n After nearly nine years at Trinity University, Sajida Jalalzai, an assistant professor of religion hired on the tenure track, is leaving this May.\u00a0<\/p>\n Provost Megan Mustain and President Vanessa Beasley denied Jalalzai tenure in February 2025, overriding unanimous recommendations from the San Antonio-based liberal arts school\u2019s Department of Religion and the Promotion and Tenure (P&T) Commission.\u00a0<\/p>\n Though Beasley cited issues with scholarship in her denial letter, Jalalzai and other faculty argue that the rationale is unfounded. Instead, Jalalzai and her attorney, University of Houston Law Center Professor Lonny Hoffman, argue the denial was a pretext for unlawful discrimination and retaliation \u2014 in part for her statements on Israel-Palestine both at on-campus events and on social media.<\/p>\n Jalalzai\u2019s denial marks the latest flashpoint in a national reckoning over how universities handle on-campus speech on the Gaza conflict. Her colleagues and legal counsel argue that she was targeted for her public comments on the conflict, a change that, if proven, could place Trinity among a growing list of institutions accused of suppressing free speech after the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel.<\/p>\n Shortly after the initial denial, P&T reaffirmed its original recommendation for tenure in March 2025, and Jalalzai appealed the president and provost\u2019s decision. Neither Jalalzai\u2019s appeal nor the P&T\u2019s recommendation resulted in a reversal of the president\u2019s decision, and without that, Jalalzai said, she has no other option but to sue.\u00a0<\/p>\n Jalalzai submitted her final tenure application to be considered on Sept. 3, 2024. Jalalzai, Hoffman and philosophy professor Judith Norman all said this is the first they have seen a provost and president reverse unanimous recommendations for a tenure applicant.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIf someone had serious concerns, don\u2019t you think it would have shown up in at least one of those two recommendations by at least one dissent? Not a single dissent in two votes,\u201d Hoffman said.\u00a0<\/p>\n Jalalzai also passed her second and fourth-year reviews \u2014 formal evaluations used to assess a professor\u2019s progress on the tenure track \u2014 with no concerns about her teaching, service or research, she said. These reviews are meant to provide clear guidance well before a final tenure decision, according to faculty members familiar with the process.<\/p>\n \u201cWhy didn\u2019t they tell her that in the fourth year review? Why instead did they say, \u2018Not only does her work count, but fantastic job?\u2019\u201d Hoffman said.\u00a0<\/p>\n The cited issues\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n The definition of \u201cpeer-reviewed\u201d is at the center of Jalalzai\u2019s tenure denial. To earn tenure, professors must demonstrate strength in teaching, service and scholarship, according to Trinity\u2019s Faculty Handbook. Though the requirements are different in each department, candidates in the Department of Religion must publish a book or three peer-reviewed articles or book chapters to fulfill proof of scholarship.\u00a0<\/p>\n Beasley and Mustain declined the Trinitonian\u2019s request for comment. However, the Trinitonian obtained Beasley\u2019s denial letter from Feb. 28, 2025. In the document, she didn\u2019t contest Jalalzai\u2019s teaching and service, but wrote that her scholarship didn\u2019t meet the religion department\u2019s stated criteria.\u00a0<\/p>\n Two of Jalalzai\u2019s submitted works were chapters in edited volumes, which Beasley argued did not qualify as peer-reviewed, since the reviews were not double-blind, she stated. <\/p>\n In double-blind reviews, both authors and reviewers of academic works remain anonymous to each other in a bid to eliminate bias based on reputation, institution and other factors.\u00a0Meanwhile, an edited volume is typically is a collection of scholarly essays tied together by a common theme.<\/p>\n In the letter, Beasley wrote that \u201cthe same individual who issued the invitation served as the sole reviewer of the work,\u201d concluding that \u201csimply stated, there is no peer review.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n One of Jalalzai\u2019s articles was published in The Routledge Handbook of Islam and Gender and edited by Justine Howe, assistant professor of religious studies at Case Western Reserve University. Beasley\u2019s letter states that, in private correspondence with Sarah Pinnock, professor and chair of the religion department, Howe said Jalalzai\u2019s article did not undergo peer review. Howe later signed a letter in support of Jalalzai, but declined comment for this article.<\/p>\n However, Jalalzai said she believes Howe was referring to the classification of the peer review.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cMy guess would be that she admitted that it wasn\u2019t double-blind peer reviewed,\u201d Jalalzai said. \u201cI think that the biggest issue is that there\u2019s been a conflation between peer review and double-blind peer review.\u201d<\/p>\n Jalalzai and her attorney argued that the Department of Religion\u2019s criteria don\u2019t specifically require double-blind review, adding that invited chapters in edited volumes are commonly reviewed and accepted within the field. They also pointed to departments such as mathematics that require specific types of peer review, arguing that if the religion department had required double-blind peer review, it would be clear.\u00a0<\/p>\n In addition, the Department of Religion\u2019s criteria state that substantive essays in anthologies and edited volumes should be listed as primary evidence of scholarship.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cWhat\u2019s awesome about this case is how utterly and obviously not believable the [administration\u2019s] reasoning is,\u201d Hoffman said. \u201cWhy can\u2019t she rely on the department\u2019s written standards that recognize the very thing she did as counting toward tenure?\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Aside from Jalalzai\u2019s published work, she received a book contract from Bloomsbury Publishing and Routledge Press in 2022, which she accepted.\u00a0<\/p>\n Though the scholarship criteria typically require a published book, a 2020 memorandum<\/a> from Deneese Jones, Trinity\u2019s vice president of academic affairs from 2016 to 2021, altered tenure scholarship expectations in response to COVID-19. The memorandum, which remains in effect through the 2025-26 academic year, states that books under contract and manuscripts in progress should be considered \u201cconcrete evidence of tangible progress in scholarship.\u201d<\/p>\n While Beasley acknowledged that the pandemic disrupted Jalalzai\u2019s fieldwork, she wrote that it was \u201cnot clear\u201d the professor\u2019s record met departmental criteria for tenure due to the \u201cinsufficient amount of peer review\u201d to assess the quality of scholarship.\u00a0<\/p>\n Clinton Colmenares, Trinity\u2019s senior director of news and media strategy, provided a statement explaining the administration doesn\u2019t comment on specific personnel cases, but said university officials \u201crespect our faculty and believe strongly that shared governance is a cornerstone of our academic community.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cTenure is one of the highest distinctions in academia,\u201d the statement said. \u201cIt is an affirmation of a faculty member\u2019s sustained and peer-reviewed contributions to teaching, scholarship, and service based on expectations designed to promote Trinity\u2019s long-held standard of academic excellence.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIn every case, the University takes very seriously its responsibility to apply standards consistently, fairly, and in alignment with the expectations Trinity sets for all tenure-track and tenured faculty members. To do otherwise would be unfair to colleagues who have achieved these expectations and would compromise the credibility of Trinity\u2019s process and standards.\u201d<\/p>\n Jalalzai\u2019s case\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Hoffman filed a charge with the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on Aug. 8, 2025.<\/p>\n Filing a claim with the EEOC is legally required<\/a> prior to launching an employment discrimination lawsuit. Jalalzai\u2019s filing with the federal agency alleged discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin and protected activity.<\/p>\n On Nov. 1, 2023<\/a>, Trinity\u2019s Muslim Student Association held a panel following Hamas\u2019 Oct. 7 attacks on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. The panel featured Jalalzai and Norman as well as Rosa Aloisi, chair of the political science department, and education lecturer Habiba Noor.<\/p>\n The event itself and other advocacy for Palestine through her social media are the root of the discrimination, according to Jalalzai and Hoffman.<\/p>\n \u201cThe only time when Sajida\u2019s name has come up as a source of controversy was a post-Oct. 7 teach-in,\u201d Hoffman said. \u201cSo, to use the language of law, that creates an inference of discrimination.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n On Dec. 6, 2023, Trinity\u2019s professors gathered for a faculty assembly which convenes twice a semester. During the meeting, Chad Spigel, Jennie Farris Railey King, professor of religion and former chair of the Faculty Senate, delivered remarks about the event.\u00a0<\/p>\n The Trinitonian obtained a document containing those remarks. Spigel confirmed that the document reflects the notes he made in preparation for the speech, but it isn\u2019t what he said verbatim.<\/p>\n \u201cMy concern was that the event was being sponsored by academic departments, which signals to students and the community that the event has been vetted,\u201d Spigel\u2019s notes read. \u201cAnd yet despite being advertised as being about the historical context, there weren\u2019t any experts on the history of Palestine or Israel on the panel.\u201d<\/p>\n According to faculty present at this assembly, some panelists felt upset about the statement that they were not experts in their fields.<\/p>\n \u201cTo be able to have a discussion, or dialogue or conversation before bringing concerns to the entire university seems like a more civil thing to do, given that we believe in conversations and civil discourse,\u201d Noor said.<\/p>\n Trinity\u2019s appeals process<\/strong><\/p>\n On June 2, 2025, Jalalzai filed a grievance with the Faculty Senate for inadequate consideration of her tenure application. This initiated the university\u2019s internal appeals process, including an investigating committee review and petition to the full senate<\/a>. Neither resulted in further consideration.<\/p>\n The investigating committee denied Jalalzai\u2019s appeal on Nov. 4, 2025. Though the full report is confidential under the guidelines put forth in the faculty handbook, the joint petition Jalalzai submitted following the denial includes a summary of the committee\u2019s findings and additional context for her appeal.<\/p>\n According to the petition, the investigating committee found that it lacked authority to review the president\u2019s stated reason for denying Jalalzai\u2019s tenure, since the president makes the final decision.\u00a0<\/p>\n However, Hoffman argued that this shows the appeal process failed to function as intended.<\/p>\n \u201cOn paper, in theory, it looks like there\u2019s an actual appeal process. In reality, in Sajida\u2019s case, she has had no appeal whatsoever,\u201d Hoffman said. \u201cIf no one actually looks at the merits of why you were denied tenure or at the standards that are used to decide that question, well, then there\u2019s no appeal.\u201d<\/p>\n Broader implications and concerns<\/strong><\/p>\n Jalalzai\u2019s tenure denial reflected two wider worries for multiple professors: the decline of shared governance and the rise in Islamophobia.<\/p>\n The faculty handbook defines faculty\u2019s role in tenure decisions as the primary center of review. However, Jalalzai\u2019s petition stated that the investigating committee\u2019s report found the term \u201cprimary\u201d may be misleading, since faculty recommendations should not be given greater weight than administrative judgment.\u00a0<\/p>\n The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) provided an advisory letter<\/a> to its Trinity chapter upon the chapter\u2019s request. In that document, the AAUP contended the opposite, warning that diminishing the faculty\u2019s authority in tenure decisions would be a \u201cgrave mistake.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhat\u2019s left then of faculty governance, and why aren\u2019t more faculty afraid that this could happen to them?\u201d\u00a0Hoffman said. \u201cYou\u2019ve given all of your power away to an administration that doesn\u2019t even have to justify its reasons.\u201d<\/p>\n Jalalzai\u2019s case also unfolds amid a national climate in which those who speak or teach about Palestine have faced heightened scrutiny, <\/a>with examples including a Texas State University professor filing a lawsuit alleging he was terminated for discussing Israel and Palestine in the classroom.<\/p>\n Multiple religion professors \u2014 from Trinity and beyond \u2014 raised concerns about islamophobia and shared governance. The Trinitonian obtained a letter addressed to Beasley<\/a> from dozens of scholars who are members of the American Academy of Religion. Signatories wrote that denying tenure despite unanimous faculty support raises \u201cserious concerns about due process and equity, as well as discrimination and academic freedom.\u201d<\/p>\n For some faculty at Trinity, that context shapes how Jalalzai\u2019s case is understood. Noor said that for those familiar with Islamophobia and political pressure around Palestine, the situation feels familiar.<\/p>\n At Trinity, faculty said the implications extend beyond a single tenure decision. Philosophy professor Norman said Jalalzai had an \u201cimmeasurable impact\u201d on campus, mentoring not only Muslim students but others working to build a more inclusive community. She warned that the decision could have lasting consequences for faculty morale and trust in the tenure system.<\/p>\n \u201cEarly career faculty need to know that there is a rational path to tenure,\u201d Norman wrote in an email. \u201cDr. Jalalzai\u2019s case proves that this is not true.\u201d<\/p>\n Trinitonian Editor-in-Chief Samara Gerstle and News Editor Adom Richards also contributed to this piece.<\/p>\n Sign Up for SA Current newsletters.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n Follow us:\u00a0Apple News<\/a>\u00a0|\u00a0Google News<\/a>\u00a0|\u00a0NewsBreak<\/a>\u00a0|\u00a0Reddit<\/a>\u00a0|\u00a0Instagram<\/a>\u00a0|\u00a0Facebook\u00a0<\/a>| Twitter<\/a>\u00a0| Or sign up for our\u00a0RSS Feed<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Related Stories<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t\t\u2018No other serious research university maintains a policy on \u201cprohibited instruction,\u201d\u2018 philosophy professor Martin Peterson wrote in his resignation letter. \t\t\t\t<\/p>\n![\"Jalalzai's](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Screenshot-2026-04-09-at-11.28.09-AM.png\")
Jalalzai\u2019s tenure denial brought the attention of national organizations. Credit: Tess Gagliano<\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t![\"Texas](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/shutterstock_1752737459.jpg\")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n
![\"This](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/2560px_0323-DEI-Protest-LS-09-1.jpg\")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n![\"Texas](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/20250904-Texas-State-University-EH-06.jpg\")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n