The Virginia Supreme Court has reaffirmed that Governor Glenn Youngkin cannot bypass the General Assembly to appoint allies to university governing boards. This decision, which involves the case of Stimson et al. v. Lucas et al., provides critical stability for institutions such as the University of Virginia (UVA), Virginia Military Institute (VMI), and George Mason University (GMU), amidst ongoing governance challenges.
By allowing the injunction issued by the Fairfax County Circuit Court to remain in effect, the Supreme Court has confirmed that Youngkin’s unconfirmed appointees are ineligible to serve on university boards. This ruling underscores a fundamental principle of public governance: university boards must be properly constituted in accordance with established laws. For institutions facing political scrutiny, strict adherence to legal standards is paramount.
Challenges Facing UVA and GMU
The situation at UVA and GMU is particularly pressing. Governor-elect Abigail Spanberger has pointed out that UVA’s board currently does not meet statutory requirements regarding alumni representation and Virginia residency. Meanwhile, GMU’s board is unable to form a quorum, which is crucial for decision-making processes.
This lack of proper governance raises serious concerns. The ongoing issues mean that no major decisions should be executed by these boards. This includes refraining from making presidential appointments or signing settlement agreements with the U.S. Department of Justice. In the case of GMU, reports suggest that Rector Charles Stimson may be involved in negotiations with the DOJ, which is troubling given the current governance structure.
Under GMU’s bylaws, only the university president, Gregory Washington, has the authority to manage the institution and execute agreements. Any actions taken by Stimson could be legally questionable, as the board lacks the necessary quorum to authorize such decisions. The rector’s ability to sign documents is limited to matters formally approved by the board, which does not extend to independent actions.
The Path Forward for Virginia’s Universities
The Virginia Supreme Court’s decision creates an opportunity for Spanberger to prioritize the appointment of qualified and legally compliant board members at UVA, GMU, and VMI. The stability and integrity of Virginia’s universities rely on these appointments, which should not be treated as routine. The outcome of these decisions will significantly impact the governance of the institutions and their ability to operate effectively.
Spanberger has indicated a commitment to act swiftly, and it is crucial that the General Assembly moves quickly to confirm these appointments. The universities have faced months of uncertainty; each additional day with an improperly constituted board exacerbates the situation, further undermining trust in these public institutions.
This moment transcends partisan politics; it focuses on reaffirming that public institutions must function according to the rules established by elected representatives. The Virginia Supreme Court has opted not to intervene on the merits of this dispute, leaving the injunction in place. The responsibility now lies with the incoming administration and the legislature to ensure that Virginia’s universities are governed in alignment with the law rather than political expediency.
By promptly appointing and confirming individuals who meet statutory requirements and understand their fiduciary duties, the governor-elect and the General Assembly can begin to restore the stability and trust that Virginia’s universities desperately need.
James Finkelstein, professor emeritus of public policy at GMU, and Judith Wilde, research professor in the Schar School of Policy and Government at GMU, emphasize the significance of these developments for the future governance of Virginia’s higher education institutions.
