Pro-Palestine phrase in California yearbook launches district debate on free speech

A senior yearbook quote at Canyon Crest Academy in California using the phrase "From the river to the sea" has sparked a district debate on free speech, with parents and board members discussing its impact on Jewish students and the need for clearer policies on student expression in school-sponsored publications.

Getting your Trinity Audio //trinityaudio.ai player ready...A senior yearbook quote has sparked a discussion about freedom of speech in the San Dieguito Union High School District. In the recently published and distributed Canyon Crest Academy yearbook, a graduating senior used the phrase “From the river to the sea” as her senior quote. The phrase that references the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea carries weight for Palestinians and for Jewish people—for some, it is an inspiring call for unity and freedom, for others it is viewed as deeply antisemitic. At the board’s June 10 meeting, parents spoke out about the quote’s impact and questioned how it could have been approved, printed and distributed under faculty supervision. That night the board reviewed changes to board policy and administrative regulations on freedom of speech/expression in student-generated, school-sponsored publications, which includes journalism and yearbooks. The board heard a first read of the proposed changes and is expected to review and approve the revised policies at a future meeting. During public comment, parent Romi Neustadt said she didn’t think the responsibility in this incident fell on the student but instead represented “yet again another failure of the district.” The district started off the 2025-26 school year responding to the fallout from the delayed response to an antisemitic incident on the San Dieguito Academy campus where students formed a human swastika on the campus field the previous spring. “There was harm,” Neustadt said about the inclusion of the quote in the yearbook. “Jewish families once again find ourselves having to explain why that language, as a call for elimination of the world’s only Jewish state, creates a hostile and exclusionary environment for Jewish students.” After the yearbook was handed out, hundreds of parents complained to CCA Principal Brett Killeen, who sent out an apology to school families. One parent said the student’s name and photo was then shared on social media. “Why has the child become the target of hostility for expressing hope for the liberation of her people?” questioned parent Tania M at the meeting. “At the center of all this is not controversy, it is a child. A child who deserves to be safe, respected and free to express hope for a better future.” The young woman’s stepfather also spoke out on her behalf, overcome by emotion at times. “Her use of the phrase was meant in a small but nonetheless meaningful manner to both celebrate her Palestinian identity, of which she is very proud, and to bear witness to the struggles of Palestinians in their historical homeland and throughout their forced diaspora. This was her intent,” her stepfather said. “Any other inferred meanings say more about the one making the inference than what she had in mind. She is a peaceful young woman and has no hate in her heart.” Another parent pointed out that in last year’s CCA yearbook, a student used the quote “Am Israel chai”, considered a rallying cry for Israel, and no apologies were issued or actions taken. While the student’s father said he supported the district’s efforts to make changes to its policies, he cautioned against “Erasing one group’s expression at the behest of another’s.” At the meeting, the board wrestled with the complex concept of free speech and student expression and how to define what constitutes a political statement. SDUHSD President Jane Lea Smith said it is not an easy problem to solve, but it is an appropriate time for the district to provide clearer guidance for students and staff, while protecting First Amendment rights and student opportunity for expression. SDUHSD Superintendent Anne Staffieri said staff conducted a thorough review of the district policies that deal with student-generated publications, which were last updated in 2019. They presented a revision to its policies that clarifies free speech rights, roles and procedures for administration, faculty advisors and student editors. Students are given freedom of speech, however, they would be restricted from using language that is obscene, libelous, or slanderous, discriminatory, harassing, intimidating, or bullying or is likely to immediately incite action on district property or during district-sponsored programs or activities. Rather than restricting material outright, the regulation spells out that the first mediation is to explore all instructional and collaborative options, making it a learning opportunity for students and staff to work through together. The policy revision also calls for the development of a school publications code and requires a disclaimer on all student-generated publications that the content is not reflective of staff or district views. “We are committed to strengthening practices that promote respect, promote inclusion and shared responsibility across all levels of our organization,” Staffieri said, adding that conversations will continue about tolerance and respect for cultural and religious backgrounds. “We have a beautiful, diverse community and student body and we want to support each and every one of our students to be safe and have a welcoming and positive learning environment for them.” Moving forward, Trustee Michael Allman said the board’s objective should be to prevent this kind of incident from happening again. He suggested regulating the time, place and manner of free speech and that the regulation should be consistent. He said yearbook and student publications should be free from political statements, recognizing that there will be arguments about what is or isn’t a political statement. “You’re free to say whatever you want but speech can come with consequences,” Allman said. “One comment in a yearbook, one tweet, one post can blow up in today’s social media and they can have terrible consequences.” Both he and Trustee Phan Anderson said the simplest and fairest solution would be to not allow quotes in the yearbook. Smith and Vice President Rigma Vislanta said they had both considered not permitting quotes but had both shifted in their thinking. Trustee Jodie Williams was not present “Under the law, the students do have a lot of freedom in creating their own generated publications and they would have the freedom to determine quotes or no quotes. And if you infringe on that and set a board direction of no quotes, that could create a challenge in limiting a student creation,” Staffieri said, noting that in the administrative regulation it specifically includes that the district develop a publication code created with faulty advisors and student involvement with oversight of administration. “To say here quotes or no quotes, I don’t think that’s an appropriate role of the board.” Allman disagreed and said he was confident that the board has the ability and responsibility to weigh in on student quotes. As the board is elected to make these kinds of tough decisions, Allman said they should decide if they should have no quotes at all, no political quotes or “anything goes.” Before the next reading of the changes, the board requested legal opinions on whether or not the board can weigh in on quotes in student-generated publications, exactly who at the district would determine what constitutes bullying/inciting language and who would define what is political language. The end goal is a policy and regulation that upholds the law, and can be consistently applied, Viskanta said. During public comment, Jeff Ladman, a half-Jewish parent to Jewish children, said that while he doesn’t know how to feel about the particular phrase that prompted the discussion, he does have strong feelings about freedom of speech. He cautioned the board against anything that would prevent students from expressing themselves, as long as they are not doing harm to others. “I feel that this is just going to continue to put the thumb down on everybody’s right to free speech and I’m very concerned about that,” Ladman said of the proposed changes. “I don’t want to diminish free speech for anyone, let alone our students.” While the board mentioned hearing the item at the following week’s meeting, it was not on the June 17 agenda. The board is dark in July and the next regular meeting is Aug. 6.