As horrible as discrimination is, it is even worse when it is mandated by the government, which is exactly what a proposal by the University of California (UC) currently under consideration by the UC Academic Senate would result in if adopted.
The University of California is considering a proposal that would have the effect of not only requiring students to be indoctrinated in bias but also subjecting those students to a program that delegitimizes their very existence. The proposal is one that on its face is innocuous, but it is designed to ensure that one group that has a long track record of promoting antisemitism may be in charge of creating and helping to implement a course in ethnic studies that will become a requirement for admission to California’s flagship university system (one that is paid for by California taxpayers).
While forcing students to learn to hate themselves is reprehensible as a matter of policy, we believe it is also a violation of the First Amendment.
Many families in California expect that their children will have an opportunity to attend a UC campus and, in fact, admission to a UC campus is a legal right for each student in the top 9% of their class. The proposed new admissions requirement for the University of California, however, will require that each prospective UC student complete a high school ethnic studies course that will likely be in line with a model curriculum that is openly antisemitic. As a result, California high schools are expected to require completion of this curriculum, including private Jewish schools.
This will force parents to make a choice for their children: give up the right to attend the University of California or be subjected to a program of delegitimization and hate so they can realize the benefits of the UC system.
Under a legal theory known as the unconstitutional conditions doctrine, this kind of choice is patently unconstitutional.
An unconstitutional condition exists where “government offers a benefit on condition that the recipient perform or forego an activity that a preferred constitutional right normally protects from government interference.”
All three basic elements of this doctrine are met by UC’s ethnic studies proposal:
First, there must be someone or something (such as a governmental entity, like a state, or a corporate entity) with rights protected by the Constitution. Second, the government has to choose to provide a benefit where it is not otherwise required to do so. Finally, the government must condition the provision of the benefit on the rightsholder waiving its right.
In the case of the ethnic studies proposal, it’s clear that the unconstitutional condition is most applicable to situations where Jewish private schools, particularly those that include instruction on ethnic and religious identity and pride, will be forced to include teaching that is dictated or guided by a group promoting antisemitism.
Jewish private schools would be forced to include teaching that is dictated or guided by a group promoting antisemitism.
Many parents choose private schools specifically to ensure that their children have a positive sense of identity and knowledge of their backgrounds, as well as the best education in traditional topics, with the additional goal of qualifying for admission to the University of California system. The ethnic studies proposal is a regulation that will impact hardest ethnic and religious minority groups, especially those with a lower income, as the University of California system often represents the only affordable option for quality higher education. It would be difficult to find a more pernicious abuse of governmental power.
The imposition of unconstitutional conditions by government, especially on a critical right such as higher education, is a fundamental attack on the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.
The proposed ethnic studies requirement is a textbook example of an unconstitutional condition.
The proposed ethnic studies requirement is a textbook example of an unconstitutional condition. Parents hold the right to provide an education for their children (and private schools hold the right to determine what they teach), the government benefit is taxpayer funded higher education available to all state residents (including a guarantee of admission for the top 9% of students) and the government will condition the government benefit on the students being indoctrinated in materials that strike at the heart of their identities, in violation of the First Amendment’s guarantees with regard to expression and religion.
The ethnic studies proposal is meant to remedy what some see as a system that has institutionalized discrimination. There are many ways to combat such discrimination, but state-mandated discrimination must not be one of them.
Marc Greendorfer is the President and co-founder of Zachor Legal Institute, a non-profit civil rights advocacy organization combating discrimination.
UC Admission Mandate is Not Just Biased Against Jews, it’s Also Unconstitutional
Marc Greendorfer
As horrible as discrimination is, it is even worse when it is mandated by the government, which is exactly what a proposal by the University of California (UC) currently under consideration by the UC Academic Senate would result in if adopted.
The University of California is considering a proposal that would have the effect of not only requiring students to be indoctrinated in bias but also subjecting those students to a program that delegitimizes their very existence. The proposal is one that on its face is innocuous, but it is designed to ensure that one group that has a long track record of promoting antisemitism may be in charge of creating and helping to implement a course in ethnic studies that will become a requirement for admission to California’s flagship university system (one that is paid for by California taxpayers).
While forcing students to learn to hate themselves is reprehensible as a matter of policy, we believe it is also a violation of the First Amendment.
Many families in California expect that their children will have an opportunity to attend a UC campus and, in fact, admission to a UC campus is a legal right for each student in the top 9% of their class. The proposed new admissions requirement for the University of California, however, will require that each prospective UC student complete a high school ethnic studies course that will likely be in line with a model curriculum that is openly antisemitic. As a result, California high schools are expected to require completion of this curriculum, including private Jewish schools.
This will force parents to make a choice for their children: give up the right to attend the University of California or be subjected to a program of delegitimization and hate so they can realize the benefits of the UC system.
Under a legal theory known as the unconstitutional conditions doctrine, this kind of choice is patently unconstitutional.
An unconstitutional condition exists where “government offers a benefit on condition that the recipient perform or forego an activity that a preferred constitutional right normally protects from government interference.”
All three basic elements of this doctrine are met by UC’s ethnic studies proposal:
First, there must be someone or something (such as a governmental entity, like a state, or a corporate entity) with rights protected by the Constitution. Second, the government has to choose to provide a benefit where it is not otherwise required to do so. Finally, the government must condition the provision of the benefit on the rightsholder waiving its right.
In the case of the ethnic studies proposal, it’s clear that the unconstitutional condition is most applicable to situations where Jewish private schools, particularly those that include instruction on ethnic and religious identity and pride, will be forced to include teaching that is dictated or guided by a group promoting antisemitism.
Many parents choose private schools specifically to ensure that their children have a positive sense of identity and knowledge of their backgrounds, as well as the best education in traditional topics, with the additional goal of qualifying for admission to the University of California system. The ethnic studies proposal is a regulation that will impact hardest ethnic and religious minority groups, especially those with a lower income, as the University of California system often represents the only affordable option for quality higher education. It would be difficult to find a more pernicious abuse of governmental power.
The imposition of unconstitutional conditions by government, especially on a critical right such as higher education, is a fundamental attack on the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.
The proposed ethnic studies requirement is a textbook example of an unconstitutional condition. Parents hold the right to provide an education for their children (and private schools hold the right to determine what they teach), the government benefit is taxpayer funded higher education available to all state residents (including a guarantee of admission for the top 9% of students) and the government will condition the government benefit on the students being indoctrinated in materials that strike at the heart of their identities, in violation of the First Amendment’s guarantees with regard to expression and religion.
The ethnic studies proposal is meant to remedy what some see as a system that has institutionalized discrimination. There are many ways to combat such discrimination, but state-mandated discrimination must not be one of them.
Marc Greendorfer is the President and co-founder of Zachor Legal Institute, a non-profit civil rights advocacy organization combating discrimination.
Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.
Editor's Picks
Israel and the Internet Wars – A Professional Social Media Review
The Invisible Student: A Tale of Homelessness at UCLA and USC
What Ever Happened to the LA Times?
Who Are the Jews On Joe Biden’s Cabinet?
You’re Not a Bad Jewish Mom If Your Kid Wants Santa Claus to Come to Your House
No Labels: The Group Fighting for the Political Center
Latest Articles
Securing the Jewish Future Begins Now — and AJU is Leading the Way
New Doctorate in Jewish Leadership Launched for Mid-Career Professionals
Depravity in Glastonbury
Instead of Shouting “America Hates Jews,” Let’s Shout Something Smarter
To Win Back America, Democrats Will Need an Abundance of Patriotism
Where Were You on July 4, 1976?
Dealing With Mamdani
His nomination dramatically underscores the tensions within the Democratic Party over Israel and the burgeoning growth of anti-Zionist sentiment among progressive voters.
A Bisl Torah — Tiny, Little Jewish Joys
These are small acts that anchor us in an ever-shifting world.
Hayek’s Fatal Conceit and the Red Heifer
A Moment in Time: “4th of July – A Time of Reflection”
Passing Through – A poem for Parsha Chukat
We’ve been passing through lands lately without asking permission…
Sderot Mayor in L.A., Mauthausen Liberation Anniversary, Braid Show’s Debut, LAJFF Kickoff
Notable people and events in the Jewish LA community.
Rabbis of LA | How Rabbi Nancy Myers Broke the Stained-Glass Ceiling
If there’s one thing that’s characterized Temple Beth David’s Rabbi Nancy Myers’ career, it’s her persistence.
Laughter, Pain and Truth: Abel Horwitz’s ‘Kosher Salt’ Tackles Antisemitism Head-On
Blending humor with hard truths, Horwitz leans into the outlandishness of anti-Jewish conspiracy theories — at one point performing as a shapeshifting lizard from outer space.
YouTuber Nate Friedman Exposes Anti-Israel Protesters in Viral Street Interviews
Friedman has a method: let people speak freely — and the more they talk, the clearer it becomes how little some of them actually understand about the topics they’re protesting.
Pride Isn’t Cancelled. It’s Just in Mitzpe Ramon Now.
Q&A: Local Iranian Jewish Journalist Expresses Optimism for Iran’s Future
In a recent phone interview with The Journal, Melamed discussed what a secular Iran might look like.
A Deafening Silence
A Jewish woman burned to death on American soil. The violence wasn’t random. It was ideological, premeditated, and still, almost no one says her name.
Nothing Fishy About These Barbecue Recipes
Whether you are planning a Fourth of July barbecue, an outdoor Shabbat or picnic-style meal, “light and delicious” is the goal.
Refreshing Summer Salads
Bright, earthy and deeply refreshing, this salad brings together the forest-like aroma of fresh herbs with a sweet and nutty crunch.
Table for Five: chukat
Complaint Department
Print Issue: Reclaiming American Values | July 4, 2025
“American values” was once shorthand for the animating ideals of liberal democracy. Now it’s become politicized. As we celebrate July 4th, Jews must lead the way in reclaiming an idea that is meant to unite us, not divide us.
Sephardic Torah from the Holy Land | A Dilemma in Damascus
Halakha and ethics: a case study.
Why Jews Must Reclaim American Values
“American values” was once shorthand for the animating ideals of liberal democracy. Now it’s become politicized. As we celebrate July 4, Jews must lead the way in reclaiming an idea that is meant to unite us, not divide us.
Rosner’s Domain | What Are We Waiting For?
We are waiting. What other choice do we have?
Dawn of a New Era in the Middle East
The ceasefire that President Trump brokered is the second crucial step in that process, not the end of the story but the start of a new chapter.
More news and opinions than at a
Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.