A California school allegedly attempted to cover up its “antisemitic” ethnic studies program, according to a lawsuit filed by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
The Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD) is accused of intentionally violating the Brown Act, California’s open meetings laws, to develop and approve antisemitic curriculum “under the radar,” according to a motion filed in the lawsuit, the ADL announced on Monday. The lawsuit, originally filed in September 2023, was brought against SAUSD on behalf of The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which works to advance the civil and human rights of the Jewish people, and its membership arm, Southern Californians for Unbiased Education (So-CUE).
The ADL, along with the Brandeis Center, the American Jewish Committee (AJC) and the Covington & Burling law firm filed the motion with new evidence that it claims supports its allegations that the school district prevented the public, in particular the Jewish community, from providing public comment to prevent antisemitic and biased content in its ethnic studies curricula. A hearing in the case is scheduled for Sept. 19.
Under the Brown Act and AB 101, which was passed in 2021 and made ethnic studies a requirement for graduation from all public high schools in California, school boards must make the public aware of the course’s proposed curricula and allow for public comment before approving any new content.
The lawsuit, the ACLU claims, is aimed at preventing antisemitic content from being taught in SAUSD while the school board goes through the process of course approval. The lawsuit also asks the court to declare that SAUSD violated the Brown Act, bar the district from teaching unlawfully approved courses and order school officials to follow open meeting laws going forward.
Examples uncovered in the discovery period of the lawsuit show that members of SAUSD’s Ethnic Studies Steering Committee noted in an official agenda that it needed to “address the Jewish question” when they learned about antisemitism concerns from the Jewish community, according to the motion. SAUSD officials also reportedly floated the idea of using Jewish holidays to approve courses to reduce the likelihood that Jews would attend school board meetings.
James Pasch, ADL senior director of national litigation, told Fox News Digital that open, public meetings are required by law to prevent these exact situations.
“Instead of welcoming input from the community as the way governing bodies can do, should do and are required to do under California state law, they saw Jews as an obstacle to exclude in the process,” he said. “As a direct consequence of that exclusion, there is now anti-Israel, anti-Jewish content in the ethnic studies curricula. At the end of the day, what we are asking for, what is required under the law is for a seat at the table.”
“The curriculum passed, so there’s ongoing harm, and we’re asking the court to step in to stop and go back to the starting line, where there is an open process from the beginning and that the ethnic studies curricula could be passed based on facts and truth,” he added.
L. Rachel Lerman, general counsel of the Brandeis Center, which is both a plaintiff and counsel in the case, indicated that the situation in Santa Ana seems to be a problem throughout the education system, specifically in California, where she believes “there’s a lack of transparency at many levels.”
At the state level, California created a model Ethnic Studies curriculum that was approved for use after the first two versions were deemed too antisemitic following public outcry, she explained. But schools in California don’t have to use the model curriculum, they can create their own as long as it stays within the confines of the law.
“You’re not supposed to be violating the anti-discrimination laws, you’re not supposed to be putting back into the class what was taken out of the earlier curricula that were rejected,” she said. “But a lot of activists were determined to bring that stuff right back in.”
Senior members of the Steering Committee, which was in charge of developing the curriculum, reportedly stated: “Jews are not a disadvantaged ethnic group in the U.S. because they were never slaves,” that “Jews greatly benefit from white privilege, so they have it better,” and “we don’t need to give both sides. We only support the oppressed, and Jews are the oppressors,” according to the motion.
That same committee also hired an external consultant whose social media musings equated Israel with “settler colonialism” and actively promoted anti-Israel bias and antisemitism, according to the motion. “Israel is nothing more than European settler colonialism draped in religion defended by white guilt and capitalism,” the consultant espoused on social media.
According to the motion, one committee leader allegedly referred to the sole Jewish member as a “colonized Jewish mind” and a “f—ing baby” for expressing concerns over antisemitism, while another leader referred to the Jewish Federation of Orange County as “racist Zionists” and suggested that SAUSD should not “cave” to their representatives. That same representative reportedly refused to call Hamas a terrorist organization even after the October 7 terrorist attack at the hands of Hamas, arguing that it would be “dehumaniz[ing]” to call Hamas members “terrorists.”
Jewish staff at SAUSD reportedly complained about the “thinly veiled antisemitism” coming from Steering Committee leaders and were “hurt by some of the things” they “said about Jews,” according to the motion. When members of the community discovered the reported covert actions of the school board to approve the material, they appeared at a meeting to publicly comment but were harassed with antisemitic rhetoric.
SAUSD told Fox News Digital that the case will soon be heard in court, where the district will “defend its action of approving certain Ethnic Studies courses mandated by California’s legislature as new graduation requirements.”
“It has been alleged in a lawsuit filed against the District that it violated state law in two respects: (1) it failed to adhere to the ‘open meeting’ requirements set out in what is called the Brown Act in approving the courses and (2) certain materials offered to teachers as resources in teaching the courses in question are unlawfully biased in that they portray the State of Israel and the Jewish community in a negative way,” the statement said. “The District denies these claims and will present counter arguments and facts to the Court for consideration and is optimistic that the Court will ultimately find in favor of the District.”
Marci Lerner Miller, the director of legal investigations at the Brandeis Center, told Fox News Digital that the evidence that SAUSD broke California law is “overwhelming.”
“The case has wide implications because it serves as an example of really extreme measures taken to keep things from the public eye, which is really what the Brown Act and AB101 were intended to prevent,” she said. “We see what happens when things are taken out of public view, things like antisemitism are rampant.”
Pasch said the ADL is “disappointed” that the district “remains unrepentant regarding its violations of state law and the deeply offensive and anti-Semitic statements made by district officials.”
“Our evidence is based primarily on the district’s own records, and we look forward to laying out that evidence to the court in this case,” he said.
