Okay, so what is the big deal about being wrong on evolution? How is it worse than getting the phases of the moon wrong? Or thinking that bronze oxidizes green like copper? Or having conflicting statements in the same paragraph? How can one error be judged so much more stringently when a survey of texts concludes:
Not one of the books we reviewed reached a level that we could call "scientifically accurate" as far as the physical science contained therein. The sheer number of errors precludes such a designation. [Source]
So the big deal about this must be anti-religious sentiment. A lawyer should take on the case and present the sheer number of very obvious scientific errors, along with outdated and discredited theories currently being presented as fact in scientific texts the UC system accepts. It would be a pretty easy religious discrimination case.
Is anybody still using these textbooks? The newest one listed was published eight years ago.
If you trace the origins of the ACLU, you'll find that it is a communist founded organization. Then, look at the "Communist Goals for America" - destruction of religion is one of the main goals, as is destruction of the family.
In our court system, however, religious discrimination only ratchets against Christianity. It rarely slips the other way.
What would be interesting is demonstrating that the creationist textbooks teach the ToE wrong.
The UC is not accepting credit from creationist textbooks that believe that evolution is wrong. I have not read that the reason is that it is claimed that it is taught wrong.
This also assumes that public school textbooks teach it correctly when the case really is that that's all they teach.