"CRT" as a thing that political actors complain about, and "CRT" the academic topic, are basically unrelated. The former is a Frankenstein's monster bogey-man built from every bad-seeming thing its crafters could attach to it[1] in order to build a rhetorical weapon. Label bad things CRT until people associate it with bad things only, then start labeling things that are good but that you don't like CRT so people automatically hate it, since you've primed them to. Any relation to academic-related CRT is incidental.
[1] Which is not a novel tactic, and it sure looks like that's what happened with this—but enough discussion of the process by some of those involved took place in the open that we don't just have to guess that that's what was going on, this time. This kind of process is carried out semi-publicly surprisingly often, I suppose because doing so is both easier and more effective than trying to keep it a secret, and, counterintuitively, evidence that it was a deliberate plan rarely seems to harm the effort or blunt its effect.
[1] Which is not a novel tactic, and it sure looks like that's what happened with this—but enough discussion of the process by some of those involved took place in the open that we don't just have to guess that that's what was going on, this time. This kind of process is carried out semi-publicly surprisingly often, I suppose because doing so is both easier and more effective than trying to keep it a secret, and, counterintuitively, evidence that it was a deliberate plan rarely seems to harm the effort or blunt its effect.