California university faculty decisively rejected a controversial ethnic studies proposal that critics say would have embedded radical progressive ideas into the core curriculum.
Key Takeaways
- A five-year push to make ethnic studies a mandatory admissions requirement for University of California students was definitively rejected by the UC Academic Senate.
- The controversial proposal faced strong opposition from those who viewed it as politically motivated, with concerns about antisemitism and ideological indoctrination.
- Internal emails leaked by a UC professor to opponents revealed concerns about the true intentions behind the ethnic studies curriculum.
- Despite strong backing from student activists and ethnic studies faculty, the proposal was ultimately defeated, challenging the narrative of universities as uniformly progressive institutions.
- The rejection demonstrates that faculty members are increasingly willing to push back against politically charged curriculum changes in higher education.
Faculty Stand Firm Against Controversial Requirement
In a significant blow to progressive activists, the University of California Academic Senate recently voted to reject a proposed ethnic studies admissions requirement that had been in development since 2020. The proposal, known as Area A-G/H Ethnic Studies, would have mandated all incoming UC students complete a one-semester ethnic studies course as part of their admission requirements. Despite five years of advocacy from student activists and ethnic studies faculty, the proposal failed to gain the necessary faculty support to move forward to the UC Regents and President Michael V. Drake.
The rejection came on April 23, 2025, when the Assembly of the Academic Senate refused to advance the proposal after a lengthy and contentious review process. This decision represents a rare instance where faculty governance has successfully pushed back against what many critics described as an ideologically-driven curriculum change. The proposal had initially been approved by the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools (BOARS) in November 2020 but faced increasing scrutiny and opposition as it moved through various review stages.
“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,” said Natalia Deeb-Sossa.
Leaked Documents Exposed Ideological Agenda
The proposal’s defeat was accelerated when internal emails were leaked by a UC professor to opponents of the measure, including the AMCHA Initiative, an organization focused on combating antisemitism on college campuses. These leaked communications raised serious concerns about the underlying political motivations behind the ethnic studies push. The AMCHA Initiative and other critics alleged the proposal would potentially incite antisemitism and promote radical ideologies under the guise of academic coursework.
Jay Sures, a prominent voice against the proposal, made his opposition clear with a direct statement: “I will do everything in my power to never let that happen.” This strong stance reflected growing concerns among many faculty members that the ethnic studies requirement represented an attempt to institutionalize political activism rather than genuine academic inquiry. The proposal’s connection to a controversial letter from the Ethnic Studies Faculty Council criticizing UC’s position on Palestinian issues further fueled opposition.
Roots in Activism, Not Academic Merit
Proponents of the ethnic studies requirement were transparent about the discipline’s political origins, noting it emerged from student protests against U.S. imperialism during the Vietnam War era. This activist foundation raised questions about whether the proposed curriculum would provide balanced educational content or serve primarily as political indoctrination. Critics argued the requirement would force students to adopt specific ideological perspectives rather than encouraging critical thinking about complex historical and social issues.
“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,” said Beshara Kehdi.
This quote from advocate Beshara Kehdi inadvertently confirms what many critics feared – that the proposed curriculum would focus heavily on political narratives about “racism, capitalism and ongoing imperial wars” rather than providing students with a balanced historical education. The rejection of the proposal signals that university faculty are increasingly unwilling to sacrifice academic standards and viewpoint diversity for political activism.
A Victory for Academic Freedom
The defeat of the ethnic studies admissions requirement represents a significant victory for those concerned about the politicization of higher education. While universities are often portrayed as monolithic progressive institutions, this case demonstrates that faculty governance can still serve as an effective check against ideological overreach. The decision shows that many academics remain committed to protecting the integrity of university curricula from political pressure campaigns, regardless of their source.
Despite the setback, ethnic studies advocates have vowed to continue their campaign, viewing it as part of a “grassroots struggle.” However, the decisive faculty rejection suggests that future attempts to institute politically charged curriculum requirements will face substantial scrutiny and opposition. For parents and students concerned about balanced education, the UC faculty’s stand against this controversial proposal offers reassurance that academic freedom still has defenders within the university system.
