US Supreme Court Failure in favor of parents in dispute over LGBT curriculum

The United States Supreme Court ruled on Friday in favor of a group of Maryland parents who sued a school district for refusing to allow families to exclude their children from lessons focused on LGBT issues.

In one 6-3 decision In the case Mahmoud v. Taylorthe Court ruled on June 27 that the parents – which included Catholics, Orthodox and Muslims – “are entitled to a preliminary judicial order” against the Montgomery Counting Education Board, which will allow them to excuse their children from the controversial lessons while the case is sent to lower courts for additional procedures.

Parents “will probably be successful in their claim that Board policies impose an unconstitutional burden on their religious exercise,” said the Court.

Reading materials, said the Supreme Court – which include the promotion of “marriages” between same -sex people – are “designed to present certain values ​​and beliefs as things that must be celebrated, and certain contrary values ​​and beliefs such as things that must be rejected.”

The materials go beyond the mere “exposure,” the judges said, and “impose a burden on the right of parents to the free exercise of religion.”

According to the district policy, the School Board only allowed exclusions in very limited circumstances, mainly related to sexual education in health class. It did not allow exclusions for school work that supported the opinions that there are more than two “genres”, that a child can become a girl, or that homosexual marriages are moral.

Part of the material initially introduced in the curriculum was designed to promote these concepts to children of only 3 years in preschool.

One of the books involved in the dispute, called Pride Puppy (Proud puppy), he taught the alphabet to preschool children with a story about a parade of homosexual pride, which introduced children to words like “drag queen“,” Leather “and” Zipper. “

It also presented young children to Marsha B. Johnson, drag queenactivist for homosexual rights dedicated to prostitution.

Becket Fund for Religious Liberty lawyers represented parents in their demand. On Friday, Eric Baxter, vice president and main advisor to Becket, described the ruling as “a historical victory for parents’ rights in Maryland and in all of the United States.”

“Children should not be forced to participate in conversations about drag queensParades of pride or gender transitions without the permission of their parents, ”he said.” Today, the Court restored common sense and made it clear that parents – not the government – have the last word in how their children are raised. “

Meanwhile, In a statement issued this Fridaythe United States Catholic Bishop Conference praised the Supreme Court for defending parents’ right to direct their children’s education.

“The public schools of our diverse country include families from many communities with a variety of deep convictions about faith and morals,” said Bishop Kevin Rhoades, president of the Bishop’s Religious Freedom Committee, in the declaration.

“When these schools address issues related to these matters, they must respect all families,” said Rhoades. “Parents do not give up their rights as the main educators of their children by sending them to public schools.”

Emphasizing that children “should not learn that their personal identity as a man or woman can separate from their body,” the bishop said that, in cases where a school teaches this ideology, “it must respect those who decide not to participate.”

The demand against the school district, located just north of Washington DC, was presented in May 2023.

The Supreme Court He took the controversial case in January of this year After two lower courts failed against a group of parents who sued the Montgomery County Board for having provided lessons and LGBT reading materials to their children.

Both the United States District Court for the Maryland district and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals They failed against the parentsclaiming that they had no right to be notified or exclude their children from sexuality literature.

The school district initially allowed parents to exclude themselves, but changed their policy less than a year later. He withdrew the book from the LGBT puppy And another book of the program curriculum last year, although the books were still available in school libraries.

During oral arguments in April, most Supreme Court judges They seemed to show sympathy towards parents In your demand.

In a dissent to Friday’s ruling, Judge Sonia Sotomayor said the decision could lead to “chaos” in public schools throughout the country.

Sotomayor suggested that LGBT materials in dispute simply represented “a range of concepts and points of view” and “new ideas.”

“Demanding schools to provide prior notice and the opportunity to exclude themselves from each lesson or reading plan that may imply the religious beliefs of a father will impose administrative charges impossible to schools,” he said.

Translated and adapted by the ACI Press team. Originally published in CNA.