Earlier this week, California broke new ground with formally fighting antisemitism. Governor Gavin Newsom signed a couple of bills, one from the Assembly and one from the Senate, that will create a statewide office solely focused on fighting antisemitism in public schools. But the move is getting some heated reactions from the community. FindLaw breaks down the new policies and what the legal landscape ahead looks like.
Examining Classrooms
California Assembly Bill 715 is landmark legislation enacted to target discrimination (especially antisemitism) in the state’s public K–12 schools. It aims to do so by prohibiting school boards and charter schools from adopting curriculum or materials that could subject students to unlawful bias. The new law updates legal protections by refining definitions relating to religion and nationality. Significantly, it also spearheads the establishment of the Office of Civil Rights within the Government Operations Agency. Within that office, the bill creates the role of Antisemitism Prevention Coordinator to equip schools with training, resources, and enforcement mechanisms for combating antisemitism.
AB 715 sets rules so lesson plans in California schools are accurate and fair. Schools can’t use textbooks or materials that discriminate against students because of religion, nationality, race, gender, or other protected traits. If a school or training program breaks these anti-bias rules, local officials have to fix the problem, and the state checks to make sure everyone follows the law.
In addition, the law makes it easier for families or students to report discrimination. Complaints are allowed for lessons or school activities, even if no member of the targeted group is present. The state can order schools to make changes and send yearly reminders to schools and families about their rights and the law’s expectations.
AB 715 is mainly about stopping antisemitism but also helps fight bias against other religious groups, including Islamophobia. Some civil rights groups worry these rules could limit classroom discussions or stop teachers from talking honestly about certain sensitive topics, affecting free speech and academic freedom.
Doubling Down on Discrimination
California Senate Bill 48 was written to work side-by-side with AB 715, adding more support for fair treatment and safe schools throughout the state. SB 48 very much depends on AB 715, as the former was designed to only go into effect if the latter became law, tying its work directly to that larger plan for inclusive education.
If AB 715 creates the Office of Civil Rights, SB 48 ensures that the office brings on board several Discrimination Prevention Coordinators. Each Coordinator handles a single category: religion, race, ethnicity, gender, or LGBTQ+. These new positions mean schools have leaders to help prevent and handle many types of discrimination—not just antisemitism.
Together, these twin bills are meant to strengthen policies that help keep K–12 schools welcoming and safe for every student, no matter their background. They also allow the state to better investigate complaints about bullying, harassment, or bias based on protected groups. By creating more leadership roles and requiring oversight, SB 48 takes California’s efforts to fight hate and promote inclusion in schools to the next level.
Lead-Up to the Laws
The two laws had their legislative origin only about a year ago. SB 48 and AB 715 were both shaped by concerns about discrimination in California schools, but their origins are not exactly the same.
AB 715 was driven by a surge in antisemitic incidents, Jewish advocacy, and testimony about the need to better protect Jewish students from hate. SB 48, meanwhile, was responding to a wider set of concerns about safety, equity, and fairness for all students, not just Jewish or religious minorities.
Leading up to the creation of these laws was statewide controversy over the way some ethnic studies courses addressed topics such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Some community members and Jewish organizations argued that these lessons at times crossed into bias against Jews.
As these debates grew, there was broad advocacy from a coalition of Jewish groups and legislators seeking stronger statewide protections. This lead to the drafting of AB 715. The bill was shaped and strengthened by public testimony, legislative hearings, and support from more than 70 Jewish organizations.
A Divisive Move
Both AB 715 and SB 48 were signed into law by Governor Newsom on Monday.
Assemblymember Dawn Addis, one of AB 715’s joint authors, called the legislation “a historic, first-in-the-nation effort that centers on the well-being of children across our state, many of whom bravely shared horrific stories about their experiences in our schools.” Key sponsors like Jesse Gabriel and Senator Scott Wiener, co-chairs of the California Legislative Jewish Caucus, stated: “California is sending a strong and unambiguous message — hate has no place in our schools and will not be tolerated.”
But the new law definitely did not sit well with everyone – notably, groups like the California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Arab Resource & Organizing Center Action, and the Jewish Voice for Peace Action. These groups pointed out that the bill was advanced without meaningful consultation with Arab or Muslim communities. They argue that the law could censor teachers, erase Palestinian narratives, and chill speech advocating for Palestinian rights. They assert that the bill threatens academic freedom and fails to address anti-Palestinian racism. They also warn that it opens the door to punishing educators who address topics like Palestine, colonialism, or human rights abuses if someone perceives their national or religious identity as offended.
We might soon see legal challenges from these communities. Stay tuned.
Related Resources:
- Fox News in Familiar Waters as Governor of California Sues for Defamation (FindLaw’s Federal Courts)
- Federal Judge Reins in Crackdown on Pro-Palestine Campus Protests (FindLaw’s Federal Courts)
- California Governor Sues Trump Over Unlawful Deployment of National Guard (FindLaw’s Federal Courts)
