Pass State Critical Race Theory Bills Now

The push by Republican state legislatures to restrict or ban the teaching of critical race theory (CRT) and its intellectual progeny has met with a number of arguments, ranging from denial that CRT exists or is taught in schools to critiques of the specific language of anti-CRT bills. To some anti-anti-CRT critics, especially among current or former conservatives, there are also structural arguments against the entire project. I have written previously about one of those arguments: the contention that dictating what is taught in public schools run by the government is none of the government’s business.

Fine, say the anti-anti-CRT crowd; maybe CRT is bad and should be kept out of schools. But it still should not be the job of state legislatures. State laws, they say, have two problems.

About the Author

Dan McLaughlin

Dan McLaughlin is a senior writer at National Review Online and a fellow at National Review Institute.

Featured Tags

The push by Republican state legislatures to restrict or ban the teaching of critical race theory (CRT) and its intellectual progeny has met with a number of arguments, ranging from denial that CRT exists or is taught in schools to critiques of the specific language of anti-CRT bills. To some anti-anti-CRT critics, especially among current or former conservatives, there are also structural arguments against the entire project. I have written previously about one of those arguments: the contention that dictating what is taught in public schools run by the government is none of the government’s business.

Fine, say the anti-anti-CRT crowd; maybe CRT is bad and should be kept out of schools. But it still should not be the job of state legislatures. State laws, they say, have two problems.