The Battle for Nevada's Soul: A Regent's Divisive Rhetoric Meets a Coalition for Inclusive Education

Introduction: A Pivotal Election for 100,000 Students

The Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE), a sprawling network serving over 100,000 students across research universities, community colleges, and state colleges, stands at a crossroads. This year, an election for the Board of Regents in District 5 has erupted into a microcosm of the national culture wars consuming American academia. The incumbent, Regent Patrick Boylan, is seeking re-election against four challengers: mutual aid organizer Lauren Cavalaro, UNLV student and planner Anthony DeLorenzo, former state legislator Moises Denis, community advocate Ashley Garcia, and higher education worker Stephanie Molina. While the candidates debate tuition, transparency, and budgets, the race’s core conflict is starkly defined by Boylan’s controversial tenure and his challengers’ unified vision for a more equitable and accountable system.

The Incumbent: A Record of Controversy and Defiance

Patrick Boylan, elected in 2021, outlines priorities of strengthening research, halting student fee increases, and addressing campus safety—the latter which he specifically frames around female athletes competing against “men,” a reference to transgender athletes. This is not an isolated comment. In 2024, the Nevada Faculty Alliance (NFA) called for his resignation due to a “history of racist and discriminatory remarks” and anti-transgender comments. Boylan’s response was not contrition but pride: “I had the balls to speak about it,” he stated, claiming he pioneered an issue now leveraged by politicians for campaigns.

His philosophical stance extends to foundational university programs. He derides Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives as “Didn’t Earn It,” aligning with a national movement to dismantle them. This ideology has tangible consequences. When asked about a crucial federal grant for campus-based childcare at UNLV—cut by the Trump administration as part of its anti-DEI efforts—Boylan expressed regret but dismissed the loss, saying, “I don’t think there is any free lunch for anybody,” and labeling such dependence “socialistic.” He was one of five regents to vote against a recently approved measure to increase tuition by 12% over three years, arguing students have it tough and administration is bloated. Paradoxically, he voices support for collective bargaining for NSHE workers, believing in the power of numbers.

The Challengers: A Coalition for Accountability and Inclusion

The four challengers present a starkly different agenda, united by themes of accessibility, transparency, and respect.

• Lauren Cavalaro, a mutual aid organizer and former small business owner, campaigns on affordability, worker support, and transparency. She argues DEI is not optional but the “baseline for a public system” in a diverse state like Nevada. She supported the NFA’s call for Boylan’s resignation, stating that ignoring faculty is “a failure to lead.” Cavalaro, who is currently suing Las Vegas police over an arrest at an anti-ICE protest, brings a perspective of grassroots activism and direct accountability.
• Anthony DeLorenzo, a Clark County planner and part-time UNLV student, prioritizes affordable tuition, campus safety, and strengthening DEI programs, which he calls “paramount” for making all students feel seen. He believes Boylan’s rhetoric makes students feel “disregarded” and unsafe. DeLorenzo emphasizes a “fiduciary responsibility” to students and supports collective bargaining for graduate students who have voted to unionize.
• Moises Denis, a former state senator with 18 years of experience crafting Nevada’s education budget, entered the race because regents were “sidetracked” and losing focus. The architect of the Promise scholarship, Denis aims to use his budgetary expertise to find savings and alternate revenue to avoid tuition hikes. He calls DEI programs critical for “removing barriers” and was influenced to run by Boylan’s comments, which he sees as a distraction from student success.
• Ashley Garcia, a substitute teacher and former community organizer, focuses on student mental health, lowering costs, and post-graduation job access. On DEI, she pragmatically prefers funded programs over “policing the language.” She strongly encouraged Boylan to “look at the demographics of Nevada,” calling his statements a “terrible example of leadership” and “simply ignorant.”
• Stephanie Molina, a higher education workforce development professional, stresses career pathways, accountability, and transparent governance. She asserts tuition hikes should not be a “system wide default” and that every student deserves a fair, opportunity-rich environment. Upon learning of Boylan’s comments, she noted they “damage confidence” in the board’s ability to govern fairly.

Analysis: The High Stakes of Governance and Rhetoric

The District 5 race transcends local politics; it is a referendum on the fundamental purpose of a public university system. NSHE manages a biennial budget exceeding $2 billion and shapes the futures of tens of thousands of Nevadans. The board’s decisions on tuition, programs, and campus climate directly affect social mobility and the state’s economic health. The challengers, in their diversity of background—from the statehouse to the classroom to mutual aid groups—collectively argue that governance must be rooted in service to this broad constituency. Their platforms are variations on a theme: institutions must be accountable to the students, faculty, and workers who comprise them, not insulated from them.

Patrick Boylan’s stance represents a profound and dangerous departure from this principle of public service. His defiance in the face of condemnation from the university’s own faculty alliance is not strength; it is an abandonment of fiduciary and moral duty. A regent’s primary responsibility is to foster an environment where all students can learn and thrive. When a regent’s language is officially condemned as creating a hostile environment for transgender students and communities of color, that regent has failed in their most basic function. His proud recalcitrance signals that the comfort of his own ideology is more important than the safety and belonging of the students he is sworn to serve.

Opinion: The Assault on Inclusion and the Defense of the Public Trust

As a firm believer in democracy, liberty, and the empowering promise of education, I find the contours of this race deeply alarming and critically important. Regent Boylan’s rhetoric and policy positions are not simply conservative; they are actively corrosive to the institutions he governs.

First, his dismissal of DEI as “Didn’t Earn It” is a malicious mischaracterization of efforts to rectify historical and systemic barriers. Equity is not about handing out unearned rewards; it is about ensuring the starting line is the same for everyone. In a state as diverse as Nevada, failing to intentionally create inclusive pathways is a guarantee of failed outcomes and wasted human potential. His casual acquiescence to the loss of a childcare grant—a vital support for student-parents struggling to “earn it” every day—reveals a shocking lack of empathy and a dogmatic adherence to a worldview that punishes the vulnerable.

Second, his focus on transgender athletes, framed as a “safety” issue, is a classic tactic of division that has no place in the sober, evidence-based governance of a university system. It inflames prejudices, distracts from substantive issues like funding and academic quality, and directly threatens the wellbeing of transgender students. When the faculty alliance, the experts who deliver the system’s core mission, call for a regent’s resignation over creating a discriminatory environment, that should be the final word. Boylan’s boastful refusal is an affront to shared governance and academic freedom.

The coalition of challengers, while not monolithic, represents the antidote: a return to governance focused on expanding opportunity, not policing identity. Denis brings budgetary realism, Cavalaro brings grassroots accountability, DeLorenzo brings the student perspective, Garcia brings community-minded pragmatism, and Molina brings professional higher-ed insight. They understand that “affordability” and “inclusion” are not separate silos but interconnected pillars of a healthy system. You cannot have one without the other. A university that is financially inaccessible or socially hostile to segments of its population has broken its public compact.

The Nevada Board of Regents should be a boring board overseeing complex budgets and academic standards. That it has become a battleground for harmful national culture wars is a tragedy imposed upon it. This election offers a clear choice: will NSHE be led by those who see its diversity as a strength to be nurtured, or by a regent who sees inclusion as a weakness to be mocked and dismantled? For the sake of every student who dreams of a better future through education, for the faculty who dedicate their lives to that mission, and for the health of Nevada’s democracy and economy, the answer must be a resounding vote for inclusion, accountability, and principled leadership. The soul of Nevada’s future is on the ballot.