In a surprising blow to progressive activists, University of California faculty members have rejected a controversial ethnic studies requirement that critics claim was designed to indoctrinate students with radical anti-American and anti-Israel ideology.
Key Takeaways
- The University of California Academic Senate rejected a proposal requiring ethnic studies courses for all UC admissions, despite five years of advocacy by progressive faculty.
- Opposition to the proposal was linked to concerns that it would promote antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment in classrooms across California.
- Internal emails leaked by a UC professor revealed the political nature of the proposal, leading to increased scrutiny from organizations like the AMCHA Initiative.
- UC Regent Jay Sures vowed to use “everything in my power” to prevent the requirement from being implemented, highlighting the internal divisions within the typically liberal university system.
- The rejection represents a rare victory for academic freedom against the growing push for mandatory ideological curricula in higher education.
Ethnic Studies Proposal Defeated After Years of Controversy
After a contentious five-year battle, University of California faculty members have blocked a proposal that would have made ethnic studies courses a requirement for all UC admissions. The proposal, known as Area A-G/H Ethnic Studies, was rejected by the UC Academic Senate on April 23, preventing it from advancing to UC Regents and President Michael V. Drake for final approval. This decision marks a significant setback for progressive activists who have been pushing for mandatory ethnic studies education since 2020, when the movement gained momentum during nationwide social justice protests.
“I will do everything in my power to never let that happen,” stated Jay Sures, a UC Regent who strongly opposed the ethnic studies requirement, revealing the depth of opposition even within the university’s leadership ranks.
The defeat of the proposal comes after a complicated review process that exposed deep ideological divisions within the university system. Initially approved by the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools (BOARS) in November 2020, the requirement underwent multiple revisions as concerns mounted about its political nature and potential consequences. The proposal would have mandated high school students complete a one-semester ethnic studies course to qualify for UC admission, effectively forcing curriculum changes throughout California’s education system.
Political Motivations and External Pressure
The controversy intensified when a UC professor leaked internal emails to opponents of the proposal, including the AMCHA Initiative, an organization that monitors antisemitism in education. These leaks exposed what many conservatives have long suspected: that ethnic studies programs often serve as vehicles for progressive political indoctrination rather than objective academic inquiry. The AMCHA Initiative specifically warned that the proposed curriculum would inject antisemitic content into classrooms across California, particularly through anti-Israel narratives common in ethnic studies programs.
“Ethnic studies — it’s about reality. It’s about history. It’s about why our communities are here and why they are the way that they are. We can’t explain those things without referring to the violent displacements resulting from racism, capitalism, and ongoing imperial wars,” stated Beshara Kehdi, revealing the explicitly anti-capitalist and anti-American framing that concerned many faculty members.
Opposition to the proposal grew significantly following its association with a letter from the UC Ethnic Studies Faculty Council criticizing the university’s stance on the Palestinian situation. This connection reinforced concerns that the requirement would be used to promote one-sided political viewpoints rather than balanced academic discussion. The UC Students Association filed a petition supporting the proposal, but faculty ultimately rejected the pressure from activist groups both within and outside the university system.
A Rare Victory Against Mandatory Ideological Education
The rejection of the ethnic studies requirement represents a surprising victory for academic freedom on California campuses, which have increasingly embraced mandatory diversity-related curricula. Critics of such requirements argue that they often function as political litmus tests rather than genuine educational initiatives. The proposal’s origins in student protests against U.S. imperialism during the Vietnam War highlight its political foundations, which many faculty members believed made it inappropriate as a universal requirement for all students.
“We have to raise the concerns in terms of why this requirement has been handled and subjected to this systemwide review in a completely different way than other requirements,” noted Natalia Deeb-Sossa, inadvertently acknowledging the special treatment and scrutiny the proposal received compared to standard academic requirements.
Despite this setback, advocates for ethnic studies have vowed to continue their campaign, characterizing it as a “grassroots struggle” against institutional resistance. However, the rejection by the Academic Senate indicates that even within California’s progressive academic environment, there remains significant resistance to ideologically driven curriculum mandates. This decision may signal a growing willingness among faculty to push back against political pressure and preserve academic independence in higher education.
