The Manhattan Institute released model legislation that would shift authority over foundational general‑education curriculum from faculty bodies to politically appointed governing boards, positioning boards as certifiers of "foundational" courses and relegating faculty to advisory roles. The proposal also ties state funding to compliance with board‑certified general‑education requirements. Authors argue the change would correct ideological capture in faculty governance and restore democratic oversight; critics say it would erode shared governance, politicize curricula, and open the door to state micromanagement of academic content. The model mirrors elements of laws enacted in states like Texas and has already influenced a wave of bills targeting DEI programs and course content. Higher‑education leaders warned the proposal could trigger legal challenges and raise accreditation questions, especially where boards would be required to annually certify core coursework and methodologies.