Relating to the procedure for determining whether a student's violation of a public school's or public institution of higher education's student code of conduct was motivated by antisemitism.

Contracts

• Student Conduct Software (SaaS): Institutions utilizing third-party conduct management platforms (e.g., Maxient, Symplicity) must require vendors to update incident reporting forms and adjudication rubrics to include the specific definition and examples from Gov. Code § 448.001.
• External Investigators: Retainer agreements with external counsel or investigators for Title VI or harassment claims must be amended to mandate the application of the statutory definition in their fact-finding reports.

Hiring/Training

• Adjudicator Training: Hearing officers, principals, and student conduct panels must be retrained. Training must distinguish between general "bias" and the specific statutory elements of antisemitism.
• Intake Triage: Staff responsible for initial complaint intake must be trained to cross-reference allegations with the statutory examples to ensure complaints are routed to the correct investigation track immediately.

Reporting & Record-Keeping

• Disciplinary Rubrics: Internal adjudication forms must be updated to include a mandatory determination field: *"Was the violation motivated by antisemitism as defined by Gov. Code § 448.001?"*
• Written Findings: Disciplinary decision letters must explicitly cite the statutory definition when enhancing penalties or documenting bias. Vague references to "hate speech" are legally insufficient under this new standard.

Fees & Costs

• Budget Impact: Low. There are no new state fees. Costs are limited to legal counsel fees for policy redlining and administrative time for training.