On April 22, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding whether a group of Maryland parents can pull their elementary-school children from classes featuring books with LGBTQ themes or characters.
The dispute began in 2022, when the Montgomery County School System in Maryland approved books with LGBTQ+ characters or themes in its language-arts curriculum. In March 2023, the school board announced there would be no opt-outs for these lessons, citing a need for inclusivity and acceptance.
In May 2023, a group of six parents filed a federal lawsuit challenging the opt-out ban, claiming it violated their families’ religious-freedom rights and other rights.
The case is known as Mahmoud v. Taylor. It’s assigned to U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman. In August 2023, Boardman declined to issue a preliminary injunction that would have paved the way for the requested opt-outs.
The parents promptly appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed Boardman’s ruling in May 2024. But in September 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
The books at issue in Mahmoud v. Taylor are age-appropriate picture books such as “Pride Puppy,” “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” “Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope” and “Love, Violet.”
During oral arguments on April 22, Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that parental demands can get carried away. She pointed to other cases where parents objected to educational information about divorce, evolution, interfaith marriage, and women working outside the home. “Where do we draw the line?” she posed.
Justice Elena Kagan echoed Sotomayor’s concerns. Without clear guidelines, she said, “It would be like opt-outs for everyone.” That would be an untenable situation for a school system, Kagan conveyed.
But Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the complaining parents aren’t trying to ban LGBTQ+ books. They simply don’t want their children exposed to them. He noted that Maryland was founded on the principle of religious freedom and he indicated support for opt-outs.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson posed several hypothetical scenarios to the complaining parents’ attorney, Eric Baxter. She asked whether a parent should be allowed to pull their child from a classroom with a gay teacher whose wedding photo is displayed on their desk. “Do we have opt out provisions for children in that position?” she asked. “This is about exposure to people of different sexual orientations.”
Moreover, Jackson asked Baxter whether a parent could pull a child from a classroom if there were a trans child in the classroom. Jackson also asked Baxter if a parent could refuse permission for their child to walk down a school hallway where “Love is Love” posters were displayed.
Baxter said the hypothetical cases raised by Jackson would be unavailing in a court of law. He emphasized that his clients are respectful of diversity but don’t want their children to be “indoctrinated.”
“Our clients agree every student deserves to be respected and loved. Nobody disagrees with that. But you don’t do that by forcing others [to participate in LGBTQ instruction],” Baxter added.
In court records, the Montgomery County Board of Education maintained the district isn’t coercing or burdening anyone’s religious beliefs. The board also said it welcomes parental input when developing school curricula. Moreover, opt-outs are allowed for Valentine’s Day celebrations, Halloween parties and Family Life and Human Sexuality classes.
The complaining parents include Tamer Mahmoud, Enas Barakat, Jeff Roman, Svitlana Roman, Chris Persak and Melissa Persak. Their attorneys couldn’t be immediately reached for comment.
Attorneys for the Montgomery County Board of Education also couldn’t be immediately reached for comment.
A ruling by the high court is expected in late June or early July.