Hindu groups sue state panel over textbooks
By Deepa Ranganathan -- Bee Staff Writer
Published 2:15 am PST Thursday, March 23, 2006
Story appeared on Page A3 of The Bee

Two Hindu groups are suing the state Board of Education, alleging the board violated state and federal law when it approved controversial changes to sixth-grade history textbooks earlier this month.

The Hindu American Foundation's complaint, filed in Sacramento Superior Court last week, claims the textbooks, as approved, violate state law by portraying Hinduism in a way that is "demeaning, stereotypical and more critical than the presentation of any other religious tradition."

The group is asking the court to throw out the board's March 8 decision and force it to rely instead on the recommendation of one of the board's advisory committees, which in December approved a different set of changes that two other Hindu organizations had requested.

The complaint of the other group, California Parents for the Equalization of Educational Materials, was filed in U.S. District Court on March 14.

In its complaint, the group argues that the state board violated the First and 14th Amendments by penalizing Hindu groups for their political affiliations and adopting textbook changes that promote Judaism and Christianity over Hinduism.

Both groups argue, in addition, that members of the board ran afoul of a state open meeting law by holding a closed meeting on the issue in January.

Paul Seave, chief counsel for the state board, said he had not read the complaints and could not comment on them.

On Tuesday, a Superior Court judge denied the Hindu American Foundation's request for a temporary restraining order on the printing of the textbooks. The court will hold a preliminary injunction hearing on April 21.

The lawsuits are the latest chapter in a months-long debate over how Hinduism should be portrayed in sixth-grade textbooks on ancient civilizations.

Two Hindu groups proposed hundreds of changes to the textbooks last fall, saying the books offered a negative and inaccurate view of their religion. After months of fierce public debate and the convening of several scholarly panels, the board voted this month to accept some of the groups' suggestions but not others.