In 1983, Sullivan co-authored The Dilemma of American Immigration: Beyond the Golden Door with Pastora San Juan Cafferty, Barry R. Chiswick and Andrew M. Greeley.

This included "Labor Force Composition and Unemployment Trends," (Clifford C. Clogg and Sullivan), "The Occupational Prestige of Women Immigrants," "Documenting Immigration," "Measuring Underemployment and Inequality in the Work Force" (Clogg, Sullivan, and Jan E. Mutchler), "Estimating Labor Absorption with Published Data," and "Women Minority Workers in the New Economy: Optimistic, Pessimistic, and Mixed Scenarios ."

Throughout the 1990s and the 2000s, Sullivan continued to publish on immigration as well as issues undertaken by universities to diversify their campuses—including the 'Texas Top 10 Percent' law.

Among Sullivan's publications during this period are: "Student Feelings of Connection to the Campus and Openness to Diversity and Challenge at a Large Research University: Evidence of Progress?"

(Jessica J. Summers, Marilla D. Svinicki, Joanna S. Gorin, and Sullivan), "Minority College Aspirations, Expectations and Applications under the Texas Top 10% Law" (Kim M. Lloyd, Kevin T. Leicht, and Sullivan), "Minority Talent Loss and the Texas Top 10 Percent Law" (Sunny Xinchun Niu, Sullivan, and Marta Tienda), and "The Promise and the Peril of the Texas Uniform Admission Law" (with Marta Tienda).

[3] On June 10, 2012, it was announced to the University that Sullivan would step down from her position on August 15, 2012, after serving two years of a five-year contract.

Leaders of the university’s governing board said they had decided to remove Sullivan, "largely because of her unwillingness to consider dramatic program cuts in the face of dwindling resources and for her perceived reluctance to approach the school with the bottom-line mentality of a corporate chief executive".

The action generated wide-scale protest and support for Sullivan from students, faculty, alumni, as well as the national academic community.

[19] In January 2015 Sullivan acknowledged that the magazine's reporting had been "discredited": the story's author failed to interview numerous alleged witnesses named in the source's account, in addition to other inconsistencies.

Sullivan said, "Before the Rolling Stone story was discredited, it seemed to resonate with some people simply because it confirmed their darkest suspicions about universities—that administrations are corrupt; that today's students are reckless and irresponsible; that fraternities are hot-beds of deviant behavior.