Oh good heavens. Nothing rides on the truth or falsity of my claim: I don't expect anyone to take my word for it at all. I was merely being polite by mentioning that my knowledge is not exhaustive so I am not stating with complete confidence that you don't know what you're talking about, while also excusing myself from having exhaustive knowledge because some knowledge is less relevant to me.

You're making an objectively verifiable claim that you want people to believe.

I'm adding flavor text.

They're not comparable.

My claim that I do want people to believe is: we should have evidence for objective claims, and we should doubt the objective claim that any laws in any states of the United States actually ban teaching black history.

I am happy to document extensively the philosophical and social justification for wanting evidence for objective claims, if you doubt that this is the cultural standard, or you doubt the epistemological validity of needing evidence under the standard (admittedly problematic, but it's a good approximation) "justified true belief" flavor of objectivity, I'm happy to provide a great deal of evidence.

That is what I want people to accept: claims should be documented.

You want us to accept that such laws exist.

I say: show us.