This lawsuit aims to block California’s new K-12 antisemitism law

A coalition of teachers and students is suing to block the implementation of a new California law that aims to address antisemitism concerns in K-12 public schools, amid ongoing debate over how classrooms can approach the latest conflict in the Middle East.

A judge is expected to hear arguments on Wednesday at the Northern District of California’s San José division. The lawsuit, filed by Jenin Younes, national legal director of the American-Arab Anti-discrimination Committee, claims that AB 715, which is set to take effect Jan. 1, 2026, is unconstitutionally vague.

“The real purpose of the bill is to chill the speech of teachers and students so that they’re afraid to talk about anything that could be deemed critical of Israel,” Younes said.

AB 715 adds to existing anti-discrimination state law through the creation of a governor-appointed Antisemitism Prevention Coordinator under a new California Office of Civil Rights. Proponents of AB 715 have said the coordinator will track antisemitic incidents at schools, help respond to cases and make policy recommendations to the state Legislature. 

Keep up with LAist.

If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.

Subscribe

The coordinator will also be tasked with training schools to identify antisemitism. The state law directs districts to rely on the Biden administration’s National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism. This federal guide, in turn, refers to the working definition of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.

Children play outside at the Jewish Family Services shelter for migrants in San Diego, Sept. 19, 2024. (Zoë Meyers for KQED)The Alliance’s definition includes 11 bullet-pointed descriptors of anti-Jewish bias. More than half of the list cites Israel, such as “claiming the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” “applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation” and “accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel.”

Earlier iterations of AB 715 echoed — and expanded — on the IHRA’s definition. According to those versions — later stricken — an antisemitic learning environment could mean classrooms where instruction or materials assert “dual loyalty directed at Jewish individuals or communities,” “inaccurate historical narratives such as labeling Israel a settler colonial state” or discriminating against a “nationality,” including “a social organization where a collective identity has emerged from a combination of shared features.”

“The earlier iterations were pretty crazy,“ said Younes, who has argued that the final version of AB 715 has the same effect “surreptitiously.”

“It’s been an incredibly frustrating process,” said David Bocarsly, executive director of the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California and one of the main backers of the law.

Bocarsly said the committee started off its efforts as California mandated new ethnic studies courses to ensure they didn’t include antisemitic content. After pushback from educators, he said proponents decided to set their sights instead on protecting Jewish students more generally — in what eventually became AB 715. (A companion law, SB 48, creates four similar coordinator positions for religion, race, gender and LGBTQ+ discrimination prevention.)

“So, even this one bill that we asked to be focused just on the Jewish community because there was a particular acute need for our community, where there were opportunities to expand and support other vulnerable communities, we ultimately leapt at those opportunities,” Bocarsly said.

Teachers still weren’t on board with revisions to AB 715. In a statement, David Goldberg, president of the California Teachers Association, the union that represents teachers in the state, said the law “raises serious free speech concerns” and “at a time when too many are seeking to attack academic freedom and weaponize public education, AB 715 would unfortunately arm ill-intentioned people with the ability to do so.”

The new law allows the public to anonymously file complaints not just about teacher materials they believe are discriminatory, but also instruction.

“Anytime that I meet with more than two teachers who are ethnic studies teachers in a group, this is one of the things that comes up. It’s like, ‘Hey, no one knows all the things that’re happening to us, and no one is really helping us,’” said Jason Muñiz, who supports around 500 Bay Area teachers in ethnic studies each year as part of his work with the University of California at Berkeley’s History-Social Science Project.

Muñiz said dozens of teachers have described becoming the subject of legal inquiries, including public records, related to lessons that touch on Judaism, Islam or the Middle East.

Bocarsly acknowledged the pressure that academic institutions face, noting that JPAC has spoken out against the Trump administration’s attempts to use antisemitism legislation as an excuse to cut school funding or diversity programs.

“We have gone through three different iterations of bills, have taken so many of [the educators’] recommendations, and they continue to move the goalposts and oppose everything that we do,” said Bocarsly, who considers the alleged lack of willingness to focus on Jewish student safety itself discrimination. “I think that there’s some implicit bias happening here.”

In the state’s official response to the motion for an injunction, California Attorney General Rob Bonta has argued that AB 715 does not create a new, undefined type of civil rights violation. He has said that fears of unfounded discrimination claims could happen under existing law and are not enough reason to block AB 715.