Across California, teachers are presenting one-sided political assertions about Israel and Jews as uncontested fact in the classroom. They are the personal political views of individual teachers presented to students as settled truth. We know exactly what the teachers are trying to convey because a group of them filed suit to stop the implementation of AB715, a bill to combat school antisemitism. This is what the teachers told the court that they wanted to teach, but that the new law would prevent them from teaching:
- That “the creation of Israel resulted in the displacement of three-quarters of a million Palestinians”
- That Israel is “occupying the West Bank and blockaded Gaza”
- That “Israel has committed war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank and genocide in Gaza”
- That Israeli settlements are evidence of “colonialism”
- That Zionists “believe Jews are superior to non-Jews”
- That Palestinian suffering exists “because Jews created Israel” As we know, these are not facts. They are these libelous accusations about Jews and Israel. But knowing that these assertions are complete distortions hardly settles on what basis you should object when your child encounters these libels at school. Many have an overwhelming inclination to point out that these assertions are incorrect. Others point out that these are antizionist statements and antizionism is antisemitism. There is nothing incorrect about these strategies, but employing these arguments will only cause a delay. Instead, we must plainly state why these assertions violate the law. They all share a common feature: they attribute collective blame to Jews as a people. Rather than examining the acts of specific historical actors, governments, or institutions, these statements treat an entire ethnoreligious group as a monolithic actor responsible for complex geopolitical events. Assigning moral culpability for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to “Jews” or “the Jewish state” is the defining feature of discriminatory rhetoric — and California law has never permitted it in public school classrooms.
Concerned Jewish Parents v. Sequoia Union High School District , No.
3:24-cv-08015-MMC (KAW) (N.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2026)
At Woodside High School and Menlo-Atherton High School in the Sequoia Union High School District, a history teacher displayed a “Free Palestine” bumper sticker on his classroom wall. On quizzes and tests, students were required to define Hamas as a “political party continuing to fight against Israel” and to state that all of Palestine is occupied by Israel, in order to receive credit. The only openly Jewish student in one class was singled out and made to feel “browbeaten.” Meanwhile, swastikas were etched into the pavement at Woodside High. Rather than investigating the incident as antisemitic, the principal told the school community that the symbols were “spiritual symbols from Japanese Buddhism.” Students called Jewish classmates “kikes” and told them “all Jews should die.” One student, S.B., stopped wearing her Star of David necklace because she no longer felt safe being visibly Jewish at school. Six families filed formal complaints. Over 200 days passed without the district completing an investigation. The families then filed a federal lawsuit. Judge Maxine Chesney denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss in significant part, finding that Title VI claims could proceed against the district, Equal Protection claims could proceed against named administrators in their personal capacities, and that S.B. had stated a viable Free Exercise claim because she stopped wearing her Star of David — which the court recognized as a substantial burden on her religious beliefs.
What families should take from this: The biased curriculum and the hostile environment are not separate problems. The teacher who presents one-sided anti- Israel content as uncontested fact creates the school culture in which student-on- student harassment thrives. Document the specific curriculum content — the exact words on the quiz, the specific video shown, the materials distributed.
Why This Violates the Law
California Education Code §§ 220, 51500, 60044: Section 220 prohibits discrimination in public schools. Section 51500 prohibits instruction that reflects adversely on persons because of their ancestry. Section 60044 prohibits instructional materials that reflect adversely upon persons because of their race, sex, color, creed, or national origin. AB 715 (effective 2025) specifically addresses antisemitic discrimination in schools and clarifies that a member of the protected group need not be present in the classroom for the instruction to be discriminatory.
Title VI and the Equal Protection Clause (42 U.S.C. § 1983): Curriculum that singles out Jews and Israelis as oppressors, colonizers, or aggressors while sanitizing violence against them can create a hostile educational environment. When the school knows about the discriminatory content and fails to act, it is deliberately indifferent under Title VI. When a school disciplines students who use slurs against other minorities but does nothing about a teacher who presents collective-blame rhetoric about Jews, the school is applying its standards inconsistently based on the identity of the victim, violating the Equal Protection Clause. .
Free Exercise Clause: When the hostile environment created by biased curriculum causes a student to abandon religious practices — such as wearing a Star of David — the school’s deliberate indifference may constitute a substantial burden on the student’s free exercise of religion.