Republican critical race theory bans are a thinly veiled appeal to white supremacy

None of us should be surprised by race-baiting in American politics, but the laws banning the teaching of critical race theory are a new low.

States that have prohibited instruction of the theory in vaguely worded laws clearly violated the First Amendment. But the Republican legislatures adopting these laws seem to care little about anything other than making a racial appeal to their white constituents.

I was surprised to see critical race theory become a focus of national debate as it is neither new nor something generally taught in K-12 classes.

Critical race theory was developed by law professors several decades ago to describe the systemic racism in American society. These scholars sought to describe how racial inequity is reproduced within our social, economic, political, legal and educational systems, detailing how this occurs even absent individual racist intent.

Those seeking to ban the teaching of the theory are creating a strawman and then attacking the very strawman they created.

“Critical race theory says every white person is a racist,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, has said.

“It basically teaches that certain children are inherently bad people because of the color of their skin,” said Alabama state legislator Chris Pringle.

Nonsense. I have read a great deal of scholarship of the theory, and none of it says that every white person is racist or that people are bad because of the color of their skin.

Laws that ban the theory, however, are vague as to what constitutes a violation. An Arizona law adopted this year prohibits “instruction that presents any form of blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity, or sex.” In other words, a teacher who talked about how white slave owners oppressed Black slaves would violate Arizona law.

A Tennessee statute says it doesn’t prevent “impartial discussion of controversial aspects of history.” Does a teacher really have to be impartial in discussing topics like slavery and Jim Crow laws that mandated segregation?

And Texas has banned the teaching of the New York Times’ Pulitzer Prize-winning 1619 Project, which states that its goal is “to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of Black Americans at the very center of the United States’ national narrative.” What’s objectionable about that?

“Efforts to remove Critical Race Theory from our educational system risk infringing on the right of faculty and students to engage in the free exchange of ideas,” states the Association of American Law Schools, of which I am president-elect. “The laws proposed or passed in states to ban the teaching of Critical Race Theory are designed to stifle a full exploration of the role of race and racism in United States history and, in so doing, they erase some people from the very classrooms in which they should be full participants as students and as educators.

“These legislative enactments substitute political mandates for the considered judgment of professional educators, who have a duty to impart truthful knowledge to their students, and to facilitate students’ opportunities to learn from each other. Academic freedom means that educators — not politicians — should make decisions about teaching and learning. The efforts to restrict teaching and learning about Critical Race Theory are, thus, inimical to the most basic notions of academic freedom.”

It’s important to see the effort to ban the teaching of the theory for what it is: an attempt by Republicans to make a race-based appeal to their constituents. It addresses a problem that doesn’t exist and offers a “solution” that will chill the speech of teachers and inhibit the learning of students.

Ironically, in trying to show that race doesn’t matter, opponents of CRT demonstrate just how much race matters in American society.