On March 10, 2006, the HAF declared it would sue. It did so at Sacramento on March 16, and a previously unknown group, California Parents for Equalization of Educational Materials (CAPEEM), filed a separate lawsuit in Seattle on March 14.
An emergency hearing to consider a temporary restraining order applied for by HAF was set for March 21; it was dismissed by the judge. A motion for a preliminary injunction filed by the HAF against the California State Board of Education (SBE) to stop the printing and distribution of several textbooks was heard and dismissed on April 21, 2006 in the California Superior Court. According to a scanned copy of the court transcript distributed by FOSA, Superior Court Judge Patrick Marlette stated that "I am not convinced that Petitioner HAF has carried their burden to show the likelihood that they would succeed on the merits, particularly on the issue of content." The HAF responded to reports of the dismissal with a press release critical of "errors in media coverage," reaffirming their "commitment to their legal action to ensure that California school textbooks accurately and equitably depict Hinduism," and explaining that "this particular denial has no bearing on the ultimate outcome of the case.". The court hearing is scheduled for September.
On August 11, 2006, Judge Frank C. Damrell of the US District Court in the Eastern District Court of California gave his judgement allowed CAPEEM's lawsuit to go forward. The complaint was filed by Venkat Balasubhramani, an attorney who has worked in the past with public interest groups, including ACLU, on civil rights matters.