A Supreme Court to hear crucial case over parental rights this spring
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear Mahmoud v. Taylor, a pivotal case addressing whether parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, can opt their children out of classroom materials that promote controversial ideologies on gender and sexuality. At the heart of the case is the Montgomery County Board of Education’s decision to revoke parental notice and opt-out rights for storybooks used in elementary classrooms, sparking a national debate about the balance between education policy and parental authority.
In 2022, the school district introduced “inclusivity” books for students in pre-K through fifth grade. While promoted as tools to foster respect and kindness, the books include content that critics say is inappropriate and ideologically driven. For example, one book for three- and four-year-olds includes a word search featuring terms like “intersex flag,” “drag queen,” “underwear,” and “leather,” along with references to an LGBTQ activist and sex worker. Another book presents gender transitioning as a child-knows-best decision, telling students that a choice to transition doesn’t need to “make sense” and framing a doctor’s identification of a newborn’s sex as merely a “guess.”
Parents argue the removal of notice and opt-outs in 2023 violates Maryland law, the Board’s own policies, and the advice of its elementary school principals. Older students, meanwhile, retain opt-out rights for similar topics introduced during high school health classes.
Read More
A Coalition of Parents Take a Stand
The lawsuit, filed by Becket, a legal advocacy group specializing in religious liberty, represents a coalition of Muslim, Christian, and Jewish parents. Despite their differing faiths, these parents share concerns that the storybooks are age-inappropriate, emotionally and spiritually damaging, and inconsistent with their beliefs.
“The School Board has pushed inappropriate gender indoctrination on our children instead of focusing on the fundamental areas of education that they need to thrive,” said Grace Morrison, a board member of Kids First, an advocacy group for parents and teachers in Montgomery County. “I pray the Supreme Court will stop this injustice, allow parents to raise their children according to their faith, and restore common sense in Maryland once again.”
Legal challenges began in 2023 when parents sued the school district in federal court. After losing at the district and appellate levels, they appealed to the Supreme Court. The Fourth Circuit’s decision upholding the opt-out ban included a dissenting opinion, underscoring the contentious nature of the case.
“Cramming down controversial gender ideology on three-year-olds without their parents’ permission is an affront to our nation’s traditions, parental rights, and basic human decency,” said Eric Baxter, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “The Court must make clear: parents, not the state, should be the ones deciding how and when to introduce their children to sensitive issues about gender and sexuality.”
Broader Implications
The case has drawn widespread attention as a bellwether for parental rights in public education. Polls indicate that most Americans support parental notice and opt-out options, aligning with the parents’ demands. If the Court rules in favor of the parents, it could set a significant precedent for similar disputes nationwide.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments later this spring. Advocates for parental rights and religious liberty see this as a critical moment to affirm the role of parents in guiding their children’s education.
For more details, view the Supreme Court docket entry here.
