Before They Banned Critical Race Theory, They Banned Mexican American Studies: Lessons from Tucson

• In Event: Race and Diversity in Higher Education after Trump 2.0: Perspective from Four Books

Abstract

Objectives: Twenty-one states have either banned or are considering banning Critical Race Theory (CRT) in schools. Arizona’s HB 2281, which eliminated the highly successful Tucson Unified School District’s Mexican American Studies program in 2010, is the blueprint for this type of state legislation. [Redacted] will present key arguments from their book on HB 2281, detailing the intense racial politics surrounding the legislation, the critical role of organized resistance to this act of state-sponsored racism, and the ultimate overturning of HB 2281. They will discuss HB 2281 as a critical precursor to the anti-CRT/DEI movement in K-16 education. Both HB 2281 and
the movement to defeat it offer powerful insights for educators and activists seeking to push back against the anti-DEI movement and repressive legalism.

Perspective: This work relies on CRT (Dixon & Rousseau, 2016; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Ray, 2023) as a foundational framework to understand how state lawmakers and media figures manufactured the Mexican American Studies controversy. A grounding assumption of CRT is that racism is both systemic and a permanent fixture of American society (Bell, 2018; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Martinez & Smith, 2025). This work is grounded in the CRT concept of narrative/counternarrative (Delgado, 1989; Miller et al., 2020). In this case, the statements from the pro-HB 2281 camp demonizing Mexican American Studies serve as the dominant narrative, and the methods of resistance (both grassroots and legal) serve as the counternarrative.

Methods/Data: There are two sources of data for this project: 1) publicly available materials regarding HB 2281 (e.g., newspaper coverage, State Superintendent of Public Instruction findings of non-compliance, op-eds, etc.) and 2) court transcripts from the multiple trials. Using a critical content analysis approach (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008; Krippendorff, 2018), the author analyzed data for two purposes: 1) To identify and theorize methods of manufacturing the Mexican American Studies controversy (i.e., the dominant narrative) and 2) To identify and theorize methods of resistance to what eventually was identified as “state-sponsored racism” (i.e., the counternarrative)

Results: Findings demonstrate two core issues with implications for the current Trump 2.0 era. First, despite the extreme power imbalance between the state of Arizona and grassroots organizers, effective resistance and disruption is always possible. Second, legally documenting and demonstrating racism is possible, despite the law’s individualistic conception of racism. Findings demonstrate that legal documentation of racism can be an incredibly powerful tool in the contemporary culture wars.

Significance: An organized legal challenge successfully overturned HB 2281, which became a central symbol in the modern-day Ethnic Studies renaissance. The example of how activists and attorneys defeated HB 2281 stands as an alternative blueprint to the anti-CRT/DEI movement: How to challenge, via grassroots activism and legal grounds, legislation in states that are currently attempting to ban Ethnic Studies, and DEI in K-16 education.

Author

• Nolan L. Cabrera, University of Arizona