This decision reverses denial of a preliminary injunction against a school district’s implementation of its board’s policy statement banning the teaching of Critical Race Theory or other similar frameworks. The opinion finds the policy infringes teachers’ First Amendment rights and is void for vagueness. It does not define Critical Race Theory in any meaningful way, does not outline what makes some other framework similar to Critical Race Theory, or what the consequences are for a teacher who violates the policy. For those reasons, plaintiffs showed a strong probability of success on the merits. As to the balance of hardships, the mere fact that the injunction is against a governmental body does not weigh heavily against issuance of an injunction, particularly when the teachers provided evidence of the disruption the policy was causing in their presentation of their classes.