top
Palestine
Palestine
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

ADC Seeks Preliminary Injunction to Block California’s AB 715

by American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
Washington, D.C., November 7, 2025 | The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) has filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, asking the court to halt enforcement of California’s Assembly Bill 715 (AB 715) before it transforms public school classrooms into censored spaces for discussions about Israel, Palestine, and the Middle East. This motion is part of the Prichett et al. v. Newsom et al., Case No. 5:25-cv-9443, the constitutional challenge ADC announced earlier this week.
Washington, D.C., November 7, 2025 | The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) has filed a motion for a preliminary injunctio...
The brief emphasizes that harm is already occurring. Because AB 715 is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2026, and directs districts to implement its requirements “as soon as possible” and no later than the next school year, teachers and students are already self-censoring for fear that past or current speech will be used to trigger complaints, investigations, and discipline.

Jenin Younes, ADC National Legal Director and lead counsel in the case said, “AB 715’s ambiguity is already silencing classrooms. That’s why we’re in court today—to stop any preparation or rollout now. A law that fails to define ‘antisemitism’ while importing a federal strategy that blurs protected political speech invites arbitrary punishment. It is vague, overbroad, and viewpoint-based, and the court should block it before further damage is done.”

AB 715, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom last month, purports to strengthen protections against antisemitism in California public schools but never defines the core term “antisemitism.” Instead, it orders districts and a new “Antisemitism Prevention Coordinator” to follow former President Biden’s U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, a 60-page policy document that in turn points to the problematic International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition. According to the motion, this structure effectively outsources California law to a contested federal policy framework that repeatedly conflates criticism of the State of Israel and Zionism with antisemitism, while California’s Education Code already bans discrimination based on religion, ethnicity, race, and national origin.

The plaintiffs are California public school teachers and students who teach and seek to learn about Israel, Palestine, and the broader Middle East. They argue that AB 715 is unconstitutionally vague under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause and overbroad and viewpoint discriminatory under the First Amendment. By failing to define antisemitism while strongly suggesting that criticism of Israel and Zionism falls within the statute’s reach, the law leaves educators guessing what they can safely say, invites arbitrary enforcement, and chills classroom instruction and discussion.

ADC’s complaint stresses that California already has strong, existing protections against discrimination based on religion, race, ethnicity, and national origin, and that if the Legislature’s only goal had been to restate those protections, there would have been no need to create a new, undefined speech-policing category tethered to external federal materials. Instead, by inventing that category and leaving the key term “antisemitism” undefined while pointing to contested external guideposts, AB 715 signals that certain perspectives on Israel and Zionism are disfavored and may be singled out for punishment.

“The Constitution does not allow politicians to smuggle an Israeli loyalty litmus test into California’s – and America’s – classrooms,” said Abed Ayoub, ADC National Executive Director. “AB 715 is a censorship law, not a civil rights law. It tells teachers that if they tell the truth about Palestinian history or criticize the Israeli government, they can be investigated and punished. It tells students that their questions and their identities are a liability. We are asking the court to stop this law before it rips up the First Amendment in our schools and hands curriculum decisions to outside pressure groups.”

The motion for preliminary injunction is requesting a hearing date before January 1, 2026.


https://adc.org/adc-seeks-preliminary-injunction-to-block-californias-ab-715/
§ADC Files Federal Suit Challenging California’s AB 715 for Chilling Classroom Speech
by American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
prichett_v._newsom_complaint_ecf_1.pdf_600_.jpg
Washington, D.C., November 3, 2025 | The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San Jose Division) on behalf of California public-school teachers and parents. As reported in the Associated Press, the case, Prichett et al. v. Newsom et al., names Governor Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta, and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond in their official capacities and challenges Assembly Bill 715, which Governor Newsom signed on October 7, 2025. The law is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2026, or earlier as permitted by the statute.

The complaint explains that AB 715 never defines “antisemitism,” yet instructs districts to “follow” former President Biden’s U.S. National Strategy to Combat Antisemitism—and related materials—which in turn implies adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism. Those standards repeatedly conflate criticism of the State of Israel and of Zionism with antisemitism—for example, by deeming it “antisemitic” to question Jewish people’s right to a majority state in a region inhabited by an equal number of Palestinians. By requiring “factually accurate” instruction while punishing teachers for accurate statements—for example, that 750,000 Palestinians were forcibly expelled during Israel’s creation—the law places educators in an impossible position. By pointing schools to a shifting set of external guideposts that conflate discussions about Israel and Palestine with antisemitism, the statute leaves teachers guessing what they can safely say about Israel, Palestine, occupation, international law, or U.S. foreign policy. That, in turn, invites arbitrary enforcement and chills classroom speech. It also misleads educators and administrators by implying immediate compliance while remaining silent about what, exactly, must change in curriculum, pedagogy, or materials.

“Our children’s rights are not negotiable. Compromised politicians in California do not have the right or authority to muzzle our children and strip away their First Amendment rights,” said ADC National Executive Director, Abed Ayoub. “AB 715 does exactly that, it rips up the First Amendment and hands classrooms to a foreign agenda. By signing this bill into law, Gov. Newsom has made it clear—he has sided with foreign interests instead of students and parents. ADC stands with the parents, students, and teachers, and we will do our part to stop this bill immediately, protect every child, and restore free speech in California.”

ADC’s plaintiffs include teachers and families across the state who want accurate instruction and robust debate about modern Middle East history, including Palestinian perspectives. The suit alleges three constitutional defects. First, AB 715 is unconstitutionally vague under the Due Process Clause because it fails to define the key terms it purports to regulate while outsourcing enforcement to a 60-page federal policy paper. As a result, teachers cannot know what they may or may not say under the law and will self-censor to avoid professional repercussions. Second, while it fails to define key terms, it strongly suggests that criticism of Israel and Zionism constitutes antisemitic discrimination, rendering the law overbroad and viewpoint-discriminatory under the First Amendment, and violating the teacher plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights by singling out disfavored perspectives about Israel and Zionism for potential punishment. Third, it violates students’ First Amendment right to receive information in the classroom.

“AB 715’s intent and effect is classroom censorship. It—probably intentionally—does not define the conduct it targets, then points schools to federal guidance that blurs legitimate criticism of a foreign state with bigotry. That combination guarantees arbitrary punishment of educators, chills valuable classroom instruction and discussion, and deprives students of the vigorous debate the Constitution protects. We brought this case to keep classrooms free to teach the truth,” said Jenin Younes, ADC National Legal Director.

The complaint details how the law’s undefined trigger, coupled with pressure for “corrective action,” makes ordinary, fact-based lessons risky. Teachers reasonably fear that a unit on settlement expansion, a discussion of the Nakba, or an assignment on contemporary human rights findings could be recast as discriminatory speech. Parents, likewise, fear their children will be shielded from key facts and viewpoints at the heart of civic education. The result is immediate confusion and a predictable chilling effect that undermines both teaching and learning.

ADC asks the court to declare AB 715 unconstitutional and to enjoin its enforcement against teachers and students. The filing emphasizes that California already prohibits discrimination based on religion, ethnicity, race, and national origin. If the Legislature intended only to restate existing protections, there was no need to add an undefined, speech-policing category. By inventing one and tethering it to external materials that conflate political critique with prejudice, AB 715 invites censorship instead of combating discrimination.


https://adc.org/adc-files-federal-suit-challenging-californias-ab-715-for-chilling-classroom-speech/
Add Your Comments
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$270.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network