Well, not in the way that some opponents claim, because they claim that CRT is something that it isn't.

But if you read Oregon's (draft) ethnic studies curriculum, it basically covers all the tenets of CRT. I'm not sure that there's any point in saying "CRT is not being taught", given their curriculum. You couldn't get much closer if you tried. And you can contrast with California's ethnic studies curriculum which (for now) is much more in the classical mold. (The difference being that CRT-based ethnic studies focuses heavily on identity and power and injustice, while classical approaches note these things but also spend a lot of time celebrating the accomplishments of diverse ethnic groups.)

The biggest outcry against "CRT" is directed against things that aren't part of CRT at all, courtesy of Christopher Rufo's intentional misinformation campaign.

But the identity-centrism is not misinformation: CRT is genuinely very big on identity. And that deserves some serious scrutiny. That the dominant message to students should be to focus on how they are a member of some rather arbitrary, ultimately ill-defined, but nonetheless widely acknowledged group, and how that group has inflicted or received injustice from another group, seems inadvisable. We have trouble enough recognizing our common humanity and thereby internalizing that we should all treat each other well. The greatest advances in social justice in the past have appealed powerfully to common humanity, and we should celebrate these advances--even if there are still a lot of improvements to make, that we have moved beyond the worst cruelties of the past is worth rejoicing in. CRT in essence discards, even repudiates this message.

I doubt it's a winning strategy. We should take the genuine insights that have been garnered under the label of CRT--certainly not sweep them under the rug!--and move on with a wiser approach.

Young people tend towards idealism. CRT is deeply cynical in construction. If we're not going to stay trapped in the patterns that CRT (correctly) identifies, it's young people who are most likely to lead the way. Attempts to instill in the young the same level of cynicism as has been accrued by the older (who focus study in areas most likely to generate cynicism) seems to me like it can only backfire.