On June 3rd, the Senate Education Committee approved ACA 7 – partial repeal of Proposition 209 in education – on a partisan vote. In spite of a strong showing of opposition from our side, Democratic state senators on the committee decided to side with racial favors and corrosive identity politics. If ACA 7 gets out of the State Legislature this year, Californians will have to decide on the 2028 state ballot whether or not we want to gut Prop. 209, once again.

At the Senate Education Committee hearing, ACA 7 supporters, including many on the committee, gave the public a litany of false characterizations of Prop. 209. Assemblymember Corey Jackson – the bill author- went so far to attack Prop. 209 as an “existential threat to African Americans in California.” Jackson called race-based treatment as “a scientific fact.” Instead of confronting such absurdity to perpetuate racism, his senate colleagues simply regurgitated these claims and reaffirmed an ideological commitment to dismantle Prop. 209.

So, where do we go from here?

Alas, the task at hand is to drive up public awareness on what is at stake if our state’s constitutional guarantee of equal protection is compromised. More discussions and deliberations need to happen to more proactively engage the public on topics related to equal rights, racial discrimination v.s. disparity, education outcome and merit. False research, frequently weaponized by proponents for racial preferences, must be unpacked and debunked.

In light of ACA 7’s development in the State Senate, CFER is now restructuring this year’s conference program to incorporate much-needed discussions on pertinent topics in our agenda. In addition to our previously scheduled panels on federal policy reforms and local organizing, our conference will focus heavily on the state-level policy and legislative landscape surrounding Prop. 209. We will explore answers to relevant questions such as:

1. Why does California’s political establishment keep attacking Prop. 209?
2. What does it mean to be equal? What is the definition of racism vs. anti-racism?
3. Are race/group-based interventions effective in reversing negative education outcomes?
4. Can racial favors be handed out without racial discrimination?
5. Have higher education institutions in California, particularly the University of California system, followed Prop. 209? What would ACA 7 accomplish in areas of financial aid and education access?
6. Can a repeal of Prop. 209 survive federal anti-discrimination laws and the Fourteenth Amendment?

The smooth progress made by yet another attack on equal rights demonstrates again the importance of our work. CFER has answered the grave call to action by standing at the forefront of defending Prop. 209. We look forward to giving you more detailed reports and presentations at our upcoming conference on July 24-25 in Irvine, California. If you have not registered to attend, please do it today!

See you next month!