Jake Paul and Gervonta Davis were set to throw down on November 14 in AtlantaCredit: NETFLIX
3
But Paul and his promotional company have withdrawn event permits and rule waivers requests required to stage the bout in GeorgiaCredit: GETTY
The fight, which has been maligned due to the immense height and weight differences between the pair, was slated to take place at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta, Georgia.
But it’s seemingly now in need of a new venue after Most Valuable Promotions, which was founded by Paul and his business partner Nikisa Bidarian, withdrew event permits and rule waivers required to stage the bout in the state.
Chairman of the Georgia Athletic and Entertainment Commission Rick Thompson revealed the news.
He told USA Today: “I believe it’s in the public’s interest to know that because they’ve been promoting something they should not have been.”
Despite MVP’s withdrawal of the necessary event permits, tickets for the fight are still available and it’s still listed on State Farm’s official website.
But Robert A. Sinners, the Communications Director for the Office of Secretary of State, insisted: “[The fight] will not be happening here.”
Neither Paul, nor Bidarian have commented on the major issue.
Bidarian, however, has teased an imminent announcement regarding the fight.
He wrote on X early on Monday morning: “Major Jake Paul vs Tank Davis event announcement this Wednesday.”
Former Disney star Paul was last in action in June against ex-WBC middleweight champion Julio Cesar Chavez Jr, over whom he laboured to a decision victory.
Dillon Danis calls out Jake Paul after slamming ‘joke’ Gervonta Davis fight and says rival is ‘stealing people’s money’
And ‘The Problem Child’ is champing at the bit to share the ring with Davis.
He said: “Gervonta is an angry little elf who has been disrespecting my name for too long.
“His nickname might be ‘Tank’, but I’m an FPV drone and I’m about to disable his a**.
“Yes, he is one of the top pound-for-pound boxers in the world, but my motto is anyone, anytime, anyplace, against all odds.
“And I like my odds. First, I am going to kill David, then I will go on to slaughter Goliath.”
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration will release an estimated $1.3 billion in previously withheld grant money for schools nationwide, but has warned states that it will rescind funding not spent for “allowable activities.”
About $5 billion to $6 billion remains in limbo. In typical years, this funding would have begun reaching states and school districts starting on July 1. California joined about two dozen states this week in suing for the release of the funds, calling the Trump administration action “unconstitutional, unlawful and arbitrary.”
In filing their lawsuit, California officials estimated that they were due close to a billion dollars. The California Department of Education said it received word Friday that the partial release represented about $158 million of that total.
The partial release came after 10 Republican senators on Wednesday sent a letter imploring the Trump administration to allow frozen education money to be sent to states.
The senators said the withheld money supported programs that had longstanding bipartisan support and were critical to local communities. The money had been appropriated by Congress in a bill that was signed by President Trump.
“We share your concern about taxpayer money going to fund radical left-wing programs,” the senators wrote to the Office of Management and Budget. “However, we do not believe that is happening with these funds.”
The Trump administration has argued otherwise, alleging that funding has been used to undermine policy goals that include having all classes conducted in English. The administration also accused agencies of using funds to advocate for immigrants who lack legal status in the country.
The notification to states about the release includes a long list of laws that states are warned not to violate including the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which bans discrimination based on sex.
“To the extent that a grantee uses grant funds for such unallowable activities,” which the notice does not define specifically, “the [Education] Department intends to take appropriate enforcement action … which may include the recovery of funds.”
In separate actions, the Trump administration already has threatened California with pulling all federal funding for violations of Trump administration policy. This threat was made recently in connection with the state allowing trans athletes to compete in girls’ and women’s sports and government officials designating their jurisdictions as sanctuaries for immigrants.
What the money pays for
The withheld money paid for after-school and summer programs, adult literacy, English language instruction, teacher training and migrant education supports. The Office of Management and Budget said it held back the funds as part of a review to align spending with White House priorities.
The funds released Friday were partly intended to support many summer school programs, some of which shut down across the country due to the hold-back. This funding also supports after-school programming during the regular school year.
Without the money, school districts and nonprofits such as the YMCA and Boys and Girls Clubs of America had said they would have to close or scale back educational offerings this fall.
The money released Friday also pays for child care so low-income parents can work. In these programs, children also receive reading and math help, along with enrichment in science and the arts.
Despite the money’s release Friday, schools and nonprofits have already been disrupted by two weeks of uncertainty. Some programs have made plans to close, and others have fallen behind on hiring and contracting for the fall.
“While we are thrilled the funds will be made available,” said Jodi Grant, executive director of the Afterschool Alliance, “the administration’s inexplicable delay in disbursing them caused massive chaos and harm.” Many after-school programs had canceled plans to open in the fall, she said.
David Schuler, executive director of AASA, an association of school superintendents, praised the release of after-school money but said that the remaining education funding should not be withheld.
“Districts should not be in this impossible position where the Administration is denying funds that had already been appropriated to our public schools, by Congress,” Schuler said in a statement. “The remaining funds must be released immediately — America’s children are counting on it.”
Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), who chairs the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that oversees education spending, was among the senators who signed the letter, which called for the full release of funds, including for adult education and teaching English as a second language.
“The decision to withhold this funding is contrary to President Trump’s goal of returning K-12 education to the states,” the senators wrote. “This funding goes directly to states and local school districts, where local leaders decide how this funding is spent.”
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) called on the White House to release the rest of the money.
“At this very moment, schools nationwide are crunching the numbers to figure out how many teachers they will need to lay off as Trump continues to hold up billions in funding,” Murray said Friday in a statement. “Every penny of this funding must flow immediately.”
Media giant Paramount Global is trying to avoid a streaming future without Cartman, Stan, Kyle and Kenny.
As Paramount struggles to complete a key merger, the company is in the midst of a protracted negotiation to extend one of its biggest and most important franchises: the long-running foulmouthed cartoon “South Park.”
Paramount’s $900-million overall deal with “South Park” creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker doesn’t expire for another two years. New episodes run first on Paramount’s basic cable network Comedy Central.
But efforts to renew that venture and bring the show to the Paramount+ streaming service have hit a major snag, according to three people familiar with the discussions who were not authorized to speak publicly.
The situation highlights deep tensions and disagreements as a trio of executives try to manage Paramount until the company’s sale to David Ellison’s Skydance Media, which has the right to approve or deny large deals such as the “South Park” pact under covenants made with Paramount.
Paramount leaders are desperate to lock down “South Park’s” streaming rights in the U.S. and abroad. They’ve long been frustrated by a licensing arrangement made six years ago by the previous regime that sent “South Park” to rival HBO Max, owned by Warner Bros. Discovery. That deal expires this month.
“South Park” is one of Paramount’s most important shows. Along with “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart,” the four boys and their celebrity-skewering ways put Comedy Central on the map for basic cable viewers, taking on hot-button issues from Scientology and the War on Terror to the royal family and the Trump administration.
During a May earnings call, Paramount co-Chief Executive Chris McCarthy — who runs Paramount’s media networks as well as Showtime and MTV Entertainment Studios — told investors that “South Park” episodes would begin streaming on Paramount+ in July.
However, Paramount hasn’t nailed down the streaming rights to “South Park,” according to the three people familiar with the conversations. Since earlier this year, Paramount has made at least one offer to Parker and Stone as an early extension of their overall deal.
The company also wants to secure rights to stream the 333 episodes of “South Park” on Paramount+.
Some of the knowledgeable people expect “South Park” distribution fees to be valued at more than $200 million a year.
But Skydance hasn’t signed off, believing the deals to be too rich, according to the sources. Paramount executives believe the show is worth the big bucks, given the show’s enduring popularity and legacy.
Representatives for Paramount and Skydance declined to comment.
Hollywood agent Ari Emanuel, whose firm WME represents Parker and Stone, defended Paramount and Skydance’s handling of the situation on Friday by phone.
“Nobody has rejected anything. They are just doing their analysis,” Emanuel told The Times in a brief interview. “We’ve got offers from other distributors. Everybody wants this show.”
Skydance’s $8-billion takeover of Paramount has been in a holding pattern for months as the two companies wait for federal regulators’ approval. Skydance, backed by tech mogul Larry Ellison and RedBird Capital Partners, is eager to take over the storied media company.
They intend to bring increased financial rigor to Paramount’s operations, other sources have said. Paramount and Skydance have told Wall Street the deal will bring $2 billion in cost savings, with half of that coming in the first year.
Deadlines are looming. The new season, the program’s 27th, is scheduled to debut July 9 on Comedy Central.
Unless Paramount strikes a deal with the creators by June 23, the company risks losing the franchise’s streaming rights because Parker and Stone could shop the show to other interested streamers, such as Netflix, Amazon Prime Video or Hulu. However, sources cautioned that negotiations could go past the June deadline and that the parties expect a deal to get done.
Represented by their longtime attorney Kevin Morris, who is leading the current negotiations, the duo carved out the internet rights nearly two decades ago. They formed a joint venture with Paramount (then known as Viacom) called South Park Digital Studios. That decision proved highly lucrative for Parker and Stone, also known for the hit Broadway musical “The Book of Mormon.”
Paramount runs the joint venture with Stone and Parker, sharing control of the streaming rights to the show that launched in 1997 on Comedy Central, although the duo can veto streaming deals they find unfavorable.
Companies are typically not supposed to wade too deeply into another firm’s affairs. Federal antitrust laws prohibit so-called gun-jumping, when an acquiring company begins calling the shots before a deal’s official closure. But Paramount agreed to accept Skydance’s input on big-ticket expenditures while the two sides wait for the deal to close.
The “South Park” streaming rights negotiations also have been complicated by a lawsuit brought two years ago by Warner Bros. Discovery. That company accused Paramount of violating terms of its 2019 licensing pact for “South Park,” after Warner paid about $540 million for the show’s streaming rights.
Paramount and the “South Park” creators developed specials featuring the four animated boys in a fictional Colorado mountain town to stream exclusively on Paramount+. Warner argued the move violated its licensing deal. HBO Max declined to comment.
Two years after the HBO Max deal, Paramount struck a new accord with Parker and Stone for $900 million, sealing their partnership and ensuring new episodes of “South Park” would be made. That deal runs to 2027, although Paramount executives have offered to extend that arrangement for several years.
Paramount has long intended to shift the show to Paramount+ as soon as the HBO Max deal expires.
The various parties have long envisioned a scenario where domestic and international rights would be shared by at least two different streaming services. Although neither partner would have exclusive rights, the current trend in television is for studios to maximize revenue to help pay for expensive programs, like “South Park,” while maintaining some streaming rights.
Paramount also has been dealing with another crisis that has been complicated by the Skydance merger. The company has sought to settle President Trump’s $20-billion lawsuit claiming subsidiary CBS News deceptively edited a “60 Minutes” interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris, an allegation CBS denies.
Trump’s case hasn’t been resolved, and the Federal Communications Commission has been slow to review Skydance’s proposed takeover of Paramount, extending the deal review.
The Skydance transaction has been pending at the FCC since last fall, leaving Paramount executives in limbo.
Lilongwe, Malawi – Since he was young, Enock Dayton has made a living from bananas. The 30-year-old was born and raised in Molele, in the southern Malawian district of Thyolo, which was at the heart of local banana production until a plant virus devastated crops more than a decade ago.
At his stall at Mchesi market, in Malawi’s capital Lilongwe, Dayton serves customers from the bunches of green bananas that he has. “I started this business when I was young, and we had farms where we were growing bananas and we would take trucks and bring them here and sell them to individuals,” he told Al Jazeera.
But in 2013, the deadly banana bunchy top disease wiped out almost all the crops in the country. Farmers were asked to uproot their banana plants to avoid the spread of the virus; hundreds of thousands of people were affected.
Bananas are Malawi’s fourth biggest staple crop, after maize, rice and cassava, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
The United Nations body – which is working with other organisations to help revive banana farming in the country – said in 2023 that with “the right investments and strategic support, the banana sector has the potential to provide greater benefits in food and nutrition security and commercial value for growers, transporters, consumers and food processors”.
But in the meantime, to maintain their businesses in the absence of sufficient local produce, farmers and fruit-sellers like Dayton turned to neighbouring Tanzania to import the crop and complement their own meagre local supplies. In 2023 alone, for instance, Malawi imported more than $491,000 worth of bananas, with the majority of that – 5,564,180kg (12,266,920lb) – coming primarily from Tanzania. The remainder came from South Africa and Mozambique.
But this year, that arrangement came to a sudden halt. In March, Malawi said it was temporarily banning the import of some farm produce, including bananas, from Tanzania and other countries. The government said this was to help support local industries and stabilise the country’s foreign exchange shortage, which has led to challenges that include the inability to import some necessities, like pharmaceuticals.
But Malawi might have underestimated the effect of its bold move, observers say.
In retaliation, in April, Tanzania banned the entry of all agricultural imports from Malawi, responding to what it described as restrictions on some of its exports. That ban also extended to South Africa, which for years prohibited the entry of bananas from Tanzania.
This was bad news for Malawi, observers say, as it is more on the receiving end of trade between the neighbours. According to data from the Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC), Malawi exports less than $50m worth of products to Tanzania, including soybean meal, soybeans and dried legumes, while it imports hundreds of millions of dollars in the form of mineral fuels, oil, distilled products, soaps, lubricants, cement and glassware, among other products.
A Malawian trader sells maize near the capital Lilongwe [File: Mike Hutchings/Reuters]
In its response, Dar es Salaam went a step further, extending its trade ban to the export of fertiliser from Tanzania to landlocked Malawi. It also threatened to stop goods en route to Malawi from passing through Tanzania.
By land, Malawi depends on Tanzania, Zambia and Mozambique for the import of goods. As it lacks direct access to the sea, Malawi utilises seaports in Tanzania and Mozambique. But the instability of the Mozambique route – due to insecurity caused by conflict, recent post-election violence and truck drivers facing harassment – made the deadlock with Tanzania a bigger challenge for industry. Businesses that rely on the import of farm produce started crying foul as their trucks of groundnuts and other produce stood in line at the Songwe border.
Malawi also found itself in a tricky situation as it depends on Tanzania for its harbours to import fuel.
Soon, even Kenya found itself entangled in the conflict as cargo from Malawi, which has to travel through Tanzania, was also stopped en route.
The ensuing row shone a light on Malawi’s precarious geographical location, as well as regional agreements aimed at facilitating trade, the efforts by individual nations to follow the rules, and the macroeconomic imbalances in a nation designated as one of the poorest in the world.
After weeks of tensions, this month, a high-level meeting between Malawi and Tanzania appeared to have brokered the differences, paving the way for the lifting of the bans between the two countries, according to a spokesperson for Malawi’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
‘Symptom of a huge challenge’
For Ernest Thindwa, a political commentator based at the University of Malawi, the recent trade dispute does not exist in isolation – and should also be viewed from a political lens.
Both countries are heading for polls this year, first Malawi in September and then Tanzania in November. Within an election environment, the dispute says something about the attempts by both countries’ leaders to display patriotism and a sense of empowerment to their citizens, the analyst said.
“The current administration [in Malawi] wants to be seen to be delivering and they want to be seen to be responding to people’s concerns,” Thindwa told Al Jazeera. “And certainly they need to make sure that local producers are protected, which has become more urgent as we go towards elections.”
Thindwa said that both Malawi and Tanzania are signatories to regional and international trade agreements, the frameworks of which entitle them to take measures to protect their trade interests when they deem necessary.
However, he questioned the timing of these moves, asking why the initiatives by Malawi were not implemented earlier if they were indeed to protect local industries.
Answering his own question, he said, “Because then it might have not been an agent in terms of attracting votes.”
“What you would call subsistence or smallholder producers … would be significant for the government in terms of trying to win votes from such social groups,” he observed.
Malawi is one of the poorest countries in the world [File: Mike Hutchings/Reuters]
Meanwhile, in Tanzania, something similar was at play in its decision to retaliate, Thindwa said.
“The incumbent administration in Tanzania wants to be seen to be responding to the needs and interests of its citizens. So the administration in that country, in Tanzania, also wanted to project an image that it cares for its people. That’s why it responded rather quickly.”
Broadly speaking, Thindwa noted that the trade dispute points to overall challenges African countries face – in terms of promoting internal trade, and trading more within Africa than with other continents.
Citing the example of Angola, he said that despite it having oil, countries within the Southern African Development Community (SADC) bloc continue to import oil from the Middle East.
“There is Angola there,” he said. “Why can’t they put together a regional project, for instance, and invest in the capabilities to make sure that the end product is being produced in Angola and Angola serves the region, to be much cheaper for the region? And it will make sure that the resources of the region remain within the region.”
Such examples show that “in spite of these trade protocols, Africa still struggles to encourage trade between member states”, he said.
“So the case of Tanzania and Malawi is just a symptom of a huge challenge Africa faces in terms of promoting internal trade.”
Tensions eased
In a statement on May 9, Malawi’s Ministry of Trade said Malawi and Tanzania had held bilateral discussions in Tanzania regarding the implementation and resolution of its prohibition order.
After that, a letter from the ministry, addressed to Malawi’s Revenue Authority, read: “In this regard, I wish to advise that you facilitate the clearance of exports and imports of goods between the Republic of Malawi and the Republic of Tanzania. This, however, does not exempt importers from complying with legal and regulatory requirements, including obtaining the relevant licences and certifications from regulatory bodies.”
After the talks, Charles Nkhalamba, Malawi’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, told Al Jazeera the neighbours had signed “a joint communique” to resolve the dispute between them.
The “high-level discussions” were a result of “robust diplomatic efforts” by the foreign ministries of both countries, he said in a message on WhatsApp, adding that Tanzania also “acknowledg[ed] the economic circumstances that necessitated the import restrictions”.
During the meeting, both parties agreed in principle on the importance of continuous engagement and communication on all matters impacting their bilateral trade relations, Nkhalamba added.
Weeks earlier, Tanzania’s Ministry of Agriculture also released a statement acknowledging that Lilongwe had reached out to Dar es Salaam to resolve the problem and stating that “Tanzania is lifting a ban on export and import of agricultural produce to and from Malawi”.
Dayton sells bananas grown in Tanzania, but longs to farm once more [Charles Pensulo/Al Jazeera]
In principle, the trade war between the neighbours appears to have stalled for now.
But experts told Al Jazeera that practically speaking, it will take time for the logistics to be sorted out and for things to return to normal for sellers left in limbo when their supplies dried up.
At the market in Lilongwe, Dayton is eagerly awaiting the trucks of sweet bananas from across the border, so he has enough to sell to his customers.
He is grateful for the cross-border trade, and the arrangement that has over the years helped business people like him make money selling the crop from their neighbours.
But he also had mixed feelings as he reminisced about their lost opportunity to grow their own crops.
“The amount of money we used to have when we grew our own bananas is different from what we’re earning now,” Dayton said. “While we were growing and buying them at a cheap price … we were making a lot of money, apart from the transport [costs]. The ones from Tanzania are quite expensive.
“We need our bananas back.”
A decade ago, Dayton was a casualty of a natural disaster that made his garden back in the village dormant. Now, he feels that he is a casualty of the decisions made by authorities in offices far away.
“What we want is a stable supply of bananas in this market,” he said. “It’s good because it provides for our families and the customers as well.”
California became a national pioneer four years ago by passing a law to make ethnic studies a high school graduation requirement. But only months before the policy is to take effect, Gov. Gavin Newsom is withholding state funding — delaying the mandate as the course comes under renewed fire.
The pause has left school districts throughout the state in limbo nearly four years after the launch deadline was set. Beginning this fall, students entering 9th grade would have been the first class required to pass a one-semester class at some point during their high school years.
But under the 2021 law, the mandate to reach 5.8 million students does not take effect unless the state provides more money to pay for the course. The funding would cover the cost of materials and the teacher staffing and training that go along with adding a new field of study.
Newsom’s office, which will issue its May revision of next year’s proposed state budget Wednesday amid a tightening financial outlook, did not respond to questions about why he has not included funding for the ethnic studies requirement that he approved, praising it as an avenue to “teach students about the diverse communities that comprise California.”
A spokesperson for the Department of Finance answered on Newsom’s behalf.
“The budget doesn’t include funding that would trigger the ethnic studies graduation requirement,” said H.D. Palmer. As to the reason why, “the short answer is that the state has limited available ongoing resources.”
At the onset, $50 million in seed money was allocated statewide, but the law stated an additional unspecified amount would be needed in the future. State officials later set that amount at about $276 million. But several years have passed without state officials budgeting the funding.
As California’s more than 1,600 high schools wind down for the year, it is uncertain how many will offer the course in the fall. Some — including Los Angeles Unified, Santa Monica Unified and Alhambra Unified — will go forward with ethnic studies no matter what. Some of these districts, including L.A. Unified, already have their own ethnic studies graduation requirement.
Others — including Chino Valley Unified — will shelve the class until the law forces them to offer it.
Still others, such as Lynwood Unified, in south L.A. County, say they are deeply concerned about any wavering in the state’s commitment to the subject.
State funding would be “critically important for sustainability,” according to a Lynwood district statement. Without it, the school district is going to cancel the course and instead teach units of ethnic studies within other classes.
“We remain committed to the principles and purpose behind ethnic studies — ensuring our students see themselves and others reflected in the curriculum,” Lynwood Supt. Gudiel R. Crosthwaite said. “However, like many school districts across California, we are navigating the dual challenge of declining enrollment and insufficient state funding to support new course mandates.”
Renewed controversy
The current political environment complicates the launch of the ethnic studies requirement.
State officials were moving toward an ethnic studies requirement amid the nation’s racial reckoning after the 2020 murder of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police, the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, and violent attacks on Asian Americans.
Many ethnic studies supporters believe that anti-racist teachings and exploring the history and perspectives of marginalized groups — Black and Indigenous people, Asians and Latinos — are key to bridging misunderstanding among students, reducing racial and ethnic conflict, and motivating teenagers to pursue social justice causes.
But not everyone sees ethnic studies the same way. Some religious and political conservatives view the state’s guidelines for ethnic studies as the kind of “woke” ideologies in education that President Trump has vowed to eliminate as he seeks to do away with diversity, equity and inclusion programming in schools.
California’s ethnic studies curriculum guide embraces pro-LGBTQ+ content and speaks of connecting students to “contemporary social movements that struggle for social justice and an equitable and democratic society, and conceptualize, imagine, and build new possibilities for a post-racist, post-systemic-racism society.”
With tensions high over how race, religion and ethnicity are taught in schools, state lawmakers recently explored legislation that would have put strict standards on how ethnic studies could be taught. That bill was supported by 31 legislators and its sponsors expressed particular concern about how ethnic studies teachers are presenting Jews and the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — re-igniting long-simmering concerns about the field of study.
Amid weekend discussions, however, the group shelved the bill — which dealt only with ethnic studies. Instead, lawmakers unveiled a broader piece of school legislation aimed at ending campus antisemitism while providing greater “anti-discrimination protections related to nationality and religion.”
A hearing on the new bill is set for Wednesday.
Teacher Amber Palma talks with student Angel Alvarez during an ethnic studies class at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood.
(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)
Although the bill’s provisions are still being crafted, it would apply to any course or schooling activity — and include a mechanism for stronger oversight of K-12 ethnic studies, which remains central to the concerns of the bill’s primary sponsors, including Assemblymember Dawn Addis (D-Morro Bay).
“Jewish families and children have been made, in many instances, to feel unwelcome or made the targets of hate and discrimination in school — where they’re supposed to feel safe and supported,” Addis said. “We want to get all the things in place to get back to what schools are supposed to be doing.”
Troy Flint, chief communications officer for the California School Boards Assn. said the ethnic studies requirement “has been fraught since its inception, and there have been starts, stumbles and restarts to try and develop a piece of legislation that’s amenable to all the different interest groups. … And I don’t know that we’ve reached that point yet.”
“School districts are in a bind,” both in terms of their costs and their academic program, he added, “because there’s a possibility a mandate could be implemented, but it’s uncertain.”
‘White supremacists generally think that they’re above people because they have money or good history or they’re related to a king or something. And I’ve seen countless immigrants get deported or accused of something because they’re considered not human or aliens. At the end of the day, we’re all human. What’s the point of having power and not using it for good?’
— Jayden A Perez, 15, a ninth-grader at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood
(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)
What’s happened since the law was approved?
Newsom signed the ethnic studies graduation requirement into law in 2021, giving districts four years to develop one or more ethnic studies classes, using a menu of materials and topics from the nearly 700-page state model curriculum guide, approved by the State Board of Education.
That curriculum guide had been a source of controversy — leading Newsom to veto an earlier bill for an ethnic studies requirement. After substantial revisions, the final version eliminated course materials that likened the Palestinian cause, in its conflict with Israel, to the struggles of marginalized groups in America — because critics said it lacked balance or nuance.
The revision also toned down what critics characterized as obscure academic jargon and bias against capitalism. More groups were added as potential study topics, including Jewish Americans, Sikhs and Armenians.
Under current law, the state’s model curriculum serves as a guide — not a required set of lessons. School districts are responsible for developing their courses and are free to teach units that reflect their enrollment. Students in Glendale, with its large Armenian American population, for example, could study the Armenian immigrant experience.
‘Understanding one’s background or ethnicity can result in conflict, but I believe that I can build bridges, because many people can understand one another and where they originally came from and what they grew up in. People should be able to talk about this and show our side of the story.’
— Gabriel Smith, 14, a ninth-grader at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood
(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)
This flexibility has allowed academic experts in the field to prepare prepackaged courses and lessons that vary widely to help schools prepare. Some are free to download. Independent Institute, for example, has posted one free curriculum that consciously aims to be less controversial in terms of current political disputes.
The group with perhaps the most long-standing ties to the field of ethnic studies in California has created a curriculum called Liberated Ethnic Studies. This curriculum also is free to download, although some of its creators and supporters have worked as school district consultants.
A portion of the Liberated content guide has worried a coalition of Jewish groups who contend portions of the curriculum veer toward antisemitism. Their concerns have fueled ongoing debate in Sacramento about the need for stricter course standards.
‘Ethnic studies should be required because you are learning about the impact of the experiences of different cultures and ethnicities. The most impactful thing I’ve learned is how one’s color or one’s culture can affect the way other people think of them — how it affects them in their daily lives and how it might affect their workplaces.’
— Arianne Moreno, 15, a ninth-grader at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood
(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)
Creators of the Liberated materials had been involved in writing the first version of the state’s model curriculum — which also was criticized by Jewish groups and legislators. State officials ultimately removed the Liberated academics from involvement in the state’s curriculum guide. And the academics, in turn, disowned the state curriculum guide and created their own materials.
A leader of the Liberated curriculum effort, Cal State Northridge professor of Chicano and Chicana studies Theresa Montaño, said she does not know how may school districts are using their lessons because they can be downloaded for free. She estimated that 70% of the Liberated content is virtually identical to the state’s revised model curriculum.
She said concerns about politicized content are overwrought.
“Ethnic studies was born out of a movement to begin to make certain that communities of color have the rightful location in the curriculum,” Montaño said.
She added that the scholars who put together the Liberated contents are recognized leading experts in an academically rigorous field that has developed over the last 60 years.
Students take part in an activity during an ethnic studies class at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood.
(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)
What’s happening in the classroom?
Ethnic studies teacher Amber Palma teaches at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood and virtually all of her students are Latino with immigrant backgrounds — and some degree of current political context is unavoidable.
“If the class is about your identity and your place in this American society — and that is a real social political issue that you are facing in context as we speak — you can’t say we’re going to not talk about what’s happening,” Palma said. “You have to address concerns, as you would with any class, with any kids.”
“Given our climate and the challenges that our students and their families and their communities are facing, I think we really do need to push the sense of empowerment, a sense of agency,” said Palma, whose district developed its own curriculum.
Students listen as teacher Amber Palma leads a discussion during an ethnic studies class at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood.
(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)
“If done right, ethnic studies is a good thing for all students,” said David Bocarsly, executive director of Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California, a lobbying group whose positions include supporting Israel’s right to exist. “Unfortunately … we have seen far too many instances of factually inaccurate and antisemitic content entering classrooms,” he said.
Bocarsly said members of his coalition of Jewish groups estimate there are real or potential problems in several dozen school districts among the 1,000 in California, based on issues that have emerged. The extent to which the Liberated curriculum is used in these districts has not been determined.
Assemblymember Addis is concerned that there could be inappropriate elements of Liberated’s alleged bias affecting “hundreds and hundreds” of school districts up and down the state.
In April, the California Department of Education concluded that two Bay Area ethnic studies teachers in the Campbell Union High School District violated California law when they included content related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that was allegedly biased and discriminated against Jewish students.
How are school districts responding?
A winter clash in the Palo Alto, Calif., school district underscores the kinds of debates that have unfolded about the course.
In a district with 40% Asian enrollment, some complained the course defined power and privilege in a way that discounted the hard work that resulted in prosperity for many immigrants. Critics also accused district officials of a lack of transparency and of not allowing for meaningful input into course content. Some were concerned that topics would be divisive.
“As feared, rancor has ensued,” said Lauren Janov, a critic of the Liberated curriculum and co-founder of Palo Alto Parent Alliance. “From the start, the state lost control of ethnic studies.”
In January, the Palo Alto board approved its own ethnic studies requirement by a 3-2 vote.
In February, Santa Ana Unified shelved three ethnic studies classes as part of a legal settlement reached with a coalition of Jewish groups. The groups had filed a lawsuit alleging that secrecy and antisemitism defined the district’s ethnic studies rollout.
The district still offers various other ethnic studies courses and has no plans to reverse policy, regardless of state funding, a district spokesperson said.
Student Arianne Moreno distributes an assignment during an ethnic studies class at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood.
(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)
In San Bernardino County, the Chino Valley Unified school board president also raises cost as an issue but sees the mandate pause as an opportunity to step back from ethnic studies.
“We made it clear that the course will not be implemented unless the state mandate goes into effect,” said Sonja Shaw, a pro-Trump Republican who is running for state superintendent of public instruction.
“Much of the ethnic studies already being pushed reflects divisive, politically driven ideology that doesn’t unite students; it separates them. …While kids are falling behind in reading, writing and math, the state continues to push its political agendas onto children,” Shaw said.
In Los Angeles Unified, the state’s largest school system, 11 courses can satisfy the district’s requirement, including a broad survey course and more specialized classes, such as African American Literature, American Indian Studies and Exploring Visual Arts through Ethnic Studies.
