Demonstrators rally outside of the Supreme Court on April 22, 2025 as the court hears arguments in a case to determine whether a Maryland school district’s reading program, which includes titles featuring LGBTQ+ characters and themes of inclusion, has unconstitutionally infringed on parents’ rights to freely exercise their religion under the First Amendment. A decision in the case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, is expected by the end of June.
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor, a case about religious parents who don’t want their children to be taught about LGBTQ+ people in public schools. The conservative justices seemed to side with the religious parents, but a lawyer for the schools argued that it’s unrealistic to allow parents to opt-out of any lessons they personally disagree with.
The plaintiffs in the case objected to their children being read books at storytime like Love, Violet, a 2021 children’s picture book about a shy girl who has a crush on her classmate, and Uncle Bobby’s Wedding, a 2025 picture book about a male same-sex wedding.
Related:
The religious parents objected to the books, saying that the books infringe on their First Amendment rights to not have their children taught about gender and sexuality in ways that conflict with their religious beliefs.
Never Miss a Beat
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
During questioning, conservative Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh asked the lawyer representing the Maryland school district why it couldn’t just allow parents to opt-out of LGBTQ+ lessons, The Washington Post reported. The district’s lawyer said that such opt-outs aren’t workable for school officials and could lead to troublesome outcomes. School leaders had previously called such opt-outs “disruptive, divisive and unworkable.”
Justice Elena Kagan pointed out that if the school allows parents to opt-out of any lessons they object to, then every parent will be allowed to ask for exceptions to any instructional content with which they religiously disagree.
“If we are to eliminate everything that is objectionable to any of these warring sects or inconsistent with any of their doctrines, we will leave public education in shreds.”
A 1948 court decision written by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson
The conservative-led U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear the case, even though it hadn’t made its way through the lower courts and still contained factual disputes. Commenters worry that the court’s 6-3 conservative majority may favor so-called religious rights over public schools’ ability to teach inclusive instructional material.
Two lower courts in this case sided with school officials
U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman (appointed by former President Joe Biden), said the school district’s policy doesn’t “impermissibly burden the religious rights of parents.” Judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said there wasn’t any evidence that the parents or kids were compelled to change their religious beliefs or actions around gender and sexuality.
“Simply hearing about other views does not necessarily exert pressure to believe or act differently than one’s religious faith requires,” wrote Judges G. Steven Agee and DeAndrea Benjamin, who were appointed by former President George W. Bush and Biden, respectively.
Outside the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, supporters of both sides demonstrated. Out LGBTQ+ Montgomery County Councilman Evan Glass said in front of a crowd holding rainbow umbrellas, “They want to erase us from existence. We celebrate our diversity. We recognize we can all coexist.”
In contrast, Wael Elkoshairi, a parent of five kids, said, “Parents rights trumps all,” adding, “[School officials and religious parents can’t agree] when inclusion stops and where indoctrination started.”
The U.S. Supreme Court has previously sided against religious parents in related cases.
In a concurring opinion on a 1948 school case, Justice Robert Jackson warned, “If we are to eliminate everything that is objectionable to any of these warring sects or inconsistent with any of their doctrines, we will leave public education in shreds.”
In 1987, the court followed Jackson’s lead by deciding against the plaintiffs in Mozert v. Hawkins County Board of Education. The plaintiffs argued that the use of magical powers depicted in Shakespeare’s Macbeth offended their religious beliefs; as such, the parents claimed a right to choose what their children could or could not read and learn at school.
The U.S. Supreme Court typically releases the majority of its decisions in mid-June.
Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.
