It might suggest 2 possible meanings for Criterion 3:  Are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group.

First, that the course solicits only 1 distinct minority group ie) Mexicans to benefit from the curriculum.   This is a non-sequitor (a conclusion that doesn’t follow from the premises) since the distinct title itself or curriculum would obviously benefit Mexican Americans and thus even more so non-Mexican Americans which is a greater population that would benefit from attending the course.
Two, that the mere study of 1 distinct ethnic group is by definition a violation thus the name itself Raza/Mexican American Studies.  If under Ethnic Studies, there are other options ie)African American or Native American studies offered, then that negates that rationale for any violation.

It would appear criterion 3 is a gaping hole to somehow limit free speech, due process, and equal protection under the law .   Also, by this so called experts only targeting Mexican American Studies if others are offered by itself sets up the rationale that it was targeted for violation.   Without a comparison to the other Ethnic Studies curriculum, there is no way to show even handedness.

The real story here is that they supposedly only found a violation of the #3 criterion thus completely suggesting that this is all smoke and mirrors possible.

Also, why would the AG’s office be pursuing this themselves and why are they acting both as prosecutor and judge and jury.  None of this tracks.  The district should refer the matter simply to the US Attorney for help to clarify why they are being targeted alone in the State of Arizona.