Santa Ana Schools Pause Ethnic Studies Amid Antisemitism Lawsuit Settlement

Key Takeaways

SAUSD suspended three ethnic studies courses after settling a 2023 lawsuit citing antisemitic content and open meeting law violations.
The district will redesign courses with diverse input, exclude biased materials, and dissolve its Ethnic Studies Steering Committee.
SAUSD must publish course drafts online for public review and pay $43,000 to a law firm supporting Jewish advocacy groups.

The Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD) in California 🇺🇸 has made headlines after settling a lawsuit related to its ethnic studies courses. On February 20, 2025, SAUSD announced that it would halt several ethnic studies classes following allegations of antisemitic content and violations of California’s open meeting laws. This decision stems from a legal case brought by prominent Jewish advocacy groups, including the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), and the American Jewish Committee (AJC).

Overview of the Legal Case

Santa Ana Schools Pause Ethnic Studies Amid Antisemitism Lawsuit Settlement

The lawsuit, initiated in 2023, accused SAUSD of developing ethnic studies courses in secrecy, violating state laws requiring public input. More troublingly, the lawsuit alleged that these courses included antisemitic teachings that marginalized Jewish perspectives. Responding to these claims, the district agreed to suspend three courses: Ethnic Studies World Geography, Ethnic Studies World Histories, and Ethnic Studies: Perspectives, Identities, and Social Justice. These courses will only resume after they are redesigned transparently, ensuring compliance with California’s open meeting laws and addressing issues around antisemitism.

While instruction of the Ethnic Studies World Histories course will be permitted for the 2024-2025 school year, all antisemitic content must be removed in line with the settlement. The Santa Ana Unified School District will also uphold its policies for teaching controversial topics like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. These policies require teaching to be based on facts, presenting all sides of an issue fairly, and avoiding the promotion of personal views by teachers or guest speakers.

Specific Settlement Requirements

As part of this agreement, SAUSD will permanently disband its Ethnic Studies Steering Committee. This committee came under scrutiny for its alleged misconduct, including accusations of hostility toward Jewish participants and controversial remarks. For example, legal documents revealed that Steering Committee officials attempted to schedule meetings on Jewish holidays, potentially excluding Jewish voices. The term “Jewish Question,” a deeply offensive phrase linked to antisemitism, even appeared on one committee agenda. Committee members reportedly characterized Jewish people as “oppressors” and accused Jewish organizations of being “racist.”

Further, the district’s relationship with an outside consultant accused of antisemitic views will also be terminated. These measures are intended to rebuild trust in SAUSD’s ethnic studies program.

The settlement also includes financial consequences. The district will pay $43,000 to a private law firm that supported the Brandeis Center in this legal battle. In addition, the district has committed to inviting groups like the ADL, the Jewish Federation of Orange County, and Southern Californians for Unbiased Education to review and contribute to future course designs. These organizations will help ensure that new courses include diverse viewpoints without promoting harmful biases.

Materials used in future ethnic studies courses will need to meet strict criteria. For example, anything that denies Jewish people’s right to self-determination or labels Israel as a “racist endeavor” is specifically prohibited unless taught through a critical, balanced lens. This approach closely mirrors standards set by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism.

Diverse Reactions to the Settlement

The settlement has sparked mixed reactions. Advocacy groups like the ADL have praised the outcome. Their vice president of national litigation, James Pasch, described the case as sending “a message — not just in Santa Ana, but from coast to coast — that if school leaders proceed with implementing antisemitic curriculum and material in violation of the law, we will use the courts to protect the community.”

On the other hand, some organizations have raised concerns. The Council on American-Islamic Relations – Los Angeles (CAIR-LA) criticized the decision, arguing that it might suppress Palestinian perspectives. Amr Shabaik, CAIR-LA’s Legal Director, remarked, “This settlement goes against the heart of what ethnic studies courses are intended to be: a structural analysis of the experience of marginalized communities and people of color, including Palestinian Americans.”

This settlement reflects broader tensions surrounding ethnic studies in California 🇺🇸. The state began requiring ethnic studies courses in high schools but left districts in charge of creating their own programs after contentious debates over antisemitism and anti-Israel bias in earlier drafts of a statewide model curriculum. This localized approach has given districts like Santa Ana both freedom and significant responsibility in handling sensitive cultural and political topics.

Implications for SAUSD and Beyond

Superintendent Jerry Almendarez defended the district, stating, “At no time has the District supported the teaching of instructional content to students that reflects adversely on any group on the basis of religion, race, ethnicity, or national origin as alleged in the lawsuit. The settlement of this lawsuit affirms that principle and resolves any misunderstanding that may have occurred.”

Looking ahead, the district must now follow strict protocols for bringing back the suspended courses. Drafts of course outlines will need to be published online at least a week before they are discussed in public meetings. Groups like the ADL, among others, will be invited to provide feedback during these discussions.

This case sends a strong message beyond Santa Ana. Marci Miller, Legal Investigation Director at the Louis D. Brandeis Center, emphasized that districts “can’t create any kind of bias or antisemitic curriculum in the dark of night and without full transparency.” She highlighted the importance of openness in designing school materials as a national standard.

The Santa Ana controversy has also ignited discussions about academic freedom. Critics of the settlement worry it could limit educators’ ability to explore complex and sensitive topics. For supporters, the case illustrates the need to prioritize inclusivity and prevent harmful biases in school curricula.

Wider Context and Future Discussions

The broader debate over ethnic studies in California and across the United States continues to evolve. The first state in the country 🇺🇸 to make ethnic studies a high school graduation requirement, California has faced challenges in balancing diverse perspectives in these programs. In many ways, the Santa Ana case reflects the difficulties of addressing interconnected cultural, historical, and political narratives in an unbiased and factually accurate way.

The requirement for greater transparency in the development of ethnic studies materials sets a precedent for other districts in the state and nationwide. It highlights the critical need for input from a wide range of stakeholders, ensuring that no single voice dominates the conversation. As reported by VisaVerge.com, this case underscores the ongoing challenge of implementing ethnic studies in ways that celebrate diversity while staying free of bias.

For school districts across California, the Santa Ana settlement serves as a warning and a learning opportunity. It shows the potential pitfalls of introducing unvetted or poorly reviewed materials into classrooms. At the same time, it demonstrates the importance of fostering open dialogue and creating educational programs that reflect diverse narratives without perpetuating harmful stereotypes.

While the debate surrounding Santa Ana’s ethnic studies courses is far from over, the settlement is a crucial step toward building trust and ensuring fairness in educational content. Moving forward, other districts will likely review their own curricula to avoid similar controversies, fostering a more inclusive yet balanced approach to teaching ethnic and cultural histories. For those interested in the official guidance on ethnic studies in California, visiting the California Department of Education’s ethnic studies webpage provides important information on legal and curricular standards in the state.

Learn Today

Ethnic Studies → Academic field exploring the experiences, histories, and cultures of marginalized communities, often emphasizing social justice and systemic analysis.
Antisemitism → Prejudice, discrimination, or hostility against Jewish people, often manifesting in harmful stereotypes, policies, or behaviors.
Open Meeting Laws → Legal requirements ensuring transparency and public participation in governmental or organizational decision-making processes.
Bias → Unfair prejudice in favor of or against a person, group, or concept, often leading to distorted judgment or discrimination.
Academic Freedom → The right of educators and students to explore and discuss ideas without censorship or institutional restrictions, within ethical boundaries.

This Article in a Nutshell

The Santa Ana Unified School District settled a lawsuit over alleged antisemitic content in its ethnic studies courses. By halting classes and mandating transparency in redesigns, this case underscores the tension between celebrating diversity and avoiding bias. It’s a reminder: education must balance inclusion, factual integrity, and respect for all perspectives.
— By VisaVerge.com