The Supreme Court says that parents can draw children from classes with books on the theme of LGBTQ

The United States Supreme Court presented a victory on Friday to the Parents of the County of Montgomery who oppose, for religious reasons, to the use by the school system of books on the theme of LGBTQ + in classrooms, affirming that parents should be authorized to remove their children from these courses.

Decision 6-3 in Mahmoud c. Taylor referred the case to lower courts for a complete hearing, but the majority left no doubt where she is on the issue, judge Samuel Alito wrote for the court that the parents have “shown that they are very likely to succeed in their free exercise” for religious claims.

“The introduction by the LGBTQ + inclusive stories council” in the literature study program, as well as its decision to refuse opt-outs as for other subjects, “imposes an unconstitutional burden on the rights of parents on the free exercise of their religion”, wrote Alito.

“The Board of Directors must be ordered to inform them (parents) in advance each time one of the books in question or any other similar book must be used in any way whatsoever and allow them to exclude their children from this instruction,” said majority opinion. Alito was joined by chief judge John Roberts and judges Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy CONEY Barrett.

In a 38 -page net dissent, judge Sonia Sotomayor – joined by judges Elena Kagan and Kentaji Brown Jackson – said that the decision of the majority would create a “chaos” for public schools of the nation, which will have to “give notice and the possibility of withdrawing from each lesson or narration plan which could involve the religious beliefs of a relative”.

Far from protecting the free exercise of religion, Sotomayor wrote, the majority “hinders our free previous exercise” in a decision whose reverberations “will be felt, I have been afraid, for generations”.

During pride, transgender Marylanders reflect on strengths, weaknesses, state protections

“Today’s decision threatens the very essence of public education. The Court, in fact, constitutionalizes a right of parental veto on the choices of programs that have long left the democratic process and local administrators, “wrote Sotomayor.

“This empty decision our free exercise previous and strikes in the main premise of public schools: so that children meet to learn not the teachings of a particular faith, but a range of concepts and points of view that reflect our whole society,” said his dissent.

The opinions of Alito and Sotomayor included appendices which include pages of the books in question, in particular “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding” and “Prince and Knight”, on the marriages of two men; “Born Ready: The True Story of A Boy named Penelope”, about a young transgender; and “Allies of intersection”, which tells stories of several children, including a transgender child.

The case, Mahmoud c. TaylorComing from a trial in 2023 submitted by a group of Muslim, Jews and Christian parents after the schools of the county of Montgomery presented books for courses from kindergarten who had stories featuring transgender or same sex characters.

When the books were introduced during the 2022-23 school year, the school system allowed parents who opposed books to withdraw their children from the courses, as they can extinguish children from health education courses, they find the offensive, for example.

But the Board of Directors was reversed in March 2023, saying that students could not get out of the language arts by using books, which schools called part of an inclusive study program which also helps to teach civility and respect.

Schools said books were widely accessory in the study program, available for students who wanted to read them. But the adversaries noted that certain schools read books aloud in class, or read them every day pride, and provided advice to teachers to counter the students or parents who opposed.

The case has never exceeded the question of a preliminary injunction against the refusal of the school system to let the students withdraw, the district and circuit courts, both leaving the policy of non-option of the school board.

The only question before the Supreme Court, which heard arguments in the case on April 22, was whether “public schools make a religious burden of parents by forcing primary children to participate in teaching on sex and sexuality against the religious condemnations of their parents and without the possibility of withdrawing?” The court judged that the policy is responsible for the rights of free exercise.

A lawyer for the Becket Fund, who represented the parents who continued the school board, praised the decision as a “victory for parental rights in Maryland”.

“Children should not be forced to conversations on Drag Queens, pride parades or gender transitions without their parents’ permission,” said Eric Baxter, vice-president of Becket Fund and Senior Lawyer, in a prepared statement. “Today, the court has restored common sense and clearly indicated that parents – not the government – have the last word on how their children are raised.”

The Montgomery school board and school system have published a joint declaration in response to the decision.

“Today’s decision is not the result we hoped for or worked. This marks an important challenge for public education nationwide, “they said.

“In the public schools of the county of Montgomery, we will determine the next steps and will navigate at the moment with integrity and objective – guided, as always, by our shared values ​​of learning, relationships, respect, excellence and equity,” said the press release.

– This story will be updated.