<p>In recent years, critical race theory (CRT) has become as a catchphrase for race, identity, and diversity, resulting in legislation across states through which lawmakers have labeled it as divisive. Despite the misalignment of CRT rhetoric with the richness of the theory in understanding inequity through race and racism, faculty still face threats and are challenged on their expertise in various academic settings because of this social context. The counterstories of faculty who employ CRT can aid in making meaning of the discursive strategies within anti-CRT legislation, as they have first-hand knowledge of the effects of anti-CRT rhetoric. Therefore, through this paper we sought to contextualize the discourse within anti-CRT legislation through the lens of faculty who utilize the theory in their teaching and research. Using van Dijk’s (2016) sociocognitive approach to critical discourse analysis (CDA), we examine the interplay between discourse, society, and cognition within 66 anti-CRT legal documents across 42 states. We then used faculty counterstories as context to evaluate the contrast of their racialized realities against the educational values presented in anti-CRT legislation. In our findings, our participants elaborated on misrepresentations of CRT that are rooted in racial ignorance and backlash to racial progress. They also critiqued legislation as a means to erase critical perspectives from the curriculum, resulting in self-censorship the requires individuals to form strategies of resistance. Our work offers implications for policy and practice that challenge organizations to critically examine racialized discourse, as anti-CRT legislation serves as the catalyst for threats to critical thought.</p>