logo
Supreme Court's conservatives are poised to strike down elementary school policy denying opt-outs for LGBTQ+ books

Supreme Court's conservatives are poised to strike down elementary school policy denying opt-outs for LGBTQ+ books

CNN22-04-2025

The Supreme Court's conservative majority on Tuesday signaled it will require schools to provide opt-outs for parents who have religious objections to LGBTQ+ books read in elementary schools, an outcome that would continue the court's years-long push to expand religious rights.
During more than two hours of feisty oral arguments in a high-profile case involving a suburban Washington, DC, school district, the court's six conservatives appeared to be aligned on the idea that the decision to decline opt-outs for books burdened the rights of religious parents.
'It has a clear moral message,' Justice Samuel Alito, a member of the court's conservative wing, said during a spirited exchange with liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
'It may be a good message,' Alito added. 'It's just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with.'
The court's liberal justices repeatedly pressed the idea that simply exposing students to ideas in a book could not possibly burden religion. A majority of the court seemed to suggest in a 2022 decision that mere exposure to ideas doesn't amount to a coercion of religious beliefs.
'Looking at two men getting married – is that the religious objection?' Sotomayor pressed the attorney for the parents who challenged the books. 'The most they're doing is holding hands.'
But others on the court seemed to be open to finding a way to side with the religious parents without finding 'coercion' took place.
Several of the key conservative justices in the middle of the court asked questions suggesting they are concerned about the approach taken by the Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland. After all, some of them noted, state law already requires its schools to opt students out of sex education if requested.
'As far as simply looking at something, looking at the image of Muhammad is a serious matter for someone who follows that religion, right?' Chief Justice John Roberts asked in a question geared at disputing the argument that looking at material can't burden religion.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh at one point appeared to be scolding the schools' position, noting that the state of Maryland was founded on 'religious tolerance, a haven for Catholics escaping persecution in England.'
'I guess I'm surprised,' Kavanaugh told the lawyer representing the schools, 'this is the hill we're going to die on in terms of not respecting religious liberty, given that history.'
The arguments – which came toward the end of a Supreme Court session that has become increasingly defined by legal challenges involving President Donald Trump – at times seemed especially tense. At one point, Sotomayor attempted to interject as Alito was speaking about one of the books involved in the dispute.
'Wait a minute,' Sotomayor jumped in.
'Can I finish, please?' Alito fired back.
As part of its English curriculum, Montgomery County approved a handful of books in 2022 at issue in the case. One, 'Prince & Knight,' tells the story of a prince who does not want to marry any of the princesses in his realm. After teaming up with a knight to slay a dragon, the two fall in love, 'filling the king and queen with joy,' according to the school's summary.
Another book, 'Born Ready,' tells the story of Penelope, a character who likes skateboarding and wearing baggy jeans. When Penelope tells his mother that he is a boy, he is accepted. When Penelope's brother questions his gender identity, their mother hugs both children and whispers, 'Not everything needs to make sense. This is about love.'
Some of the justices appeared to be taken aback by the content. At one point, the attorney for the schools was explaining one of the books – which has since been removed from the curriculum – when Justice Neil Gorsuch jumped in. Gorsuch and several of his colleagues indicated they had read the books.
'That's the one where they are supposed to look for the leather and things – and bondage, things like that,' Gorsuch said.
'It's not bondage,' the schools' attorney, Alan Schoenfeld, interjected.
'Sex worker, right?' Gorsuch said.
'No,' Schoenfeld said.
'Drag queen?' Gorsuch continued, after being reminded of the part of the book at issue by his neighbor on the bench, Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
'The leather that they're pointing to is a woman in a leather jacket,' Schoenfeld said, who acknowledged the students had the option of looking for that at the end of the book. 'And one of the words is 'drag queen.''
Kavanaugh, who often sits at the ideological center of the court, repeatedly came back to an argument that it wouldn't be a huge problem for the district to simply allow parents to opt their children out.
'I'm not understanding why it's not feasible,' he said.
But that argument has drawn sharp criticism from the schools and its allies. The schools said that an earlier effort to allow opt-outs was disruptive. And, they say, it would allow parents who object to any number of classroom discussions to opt out of a wide range of curriculum they find offense. What if, they argued, a student made a presentation in class about their same-sex parents: How could the teacher or principal be aware and handle notification of any possible presentation a parent might find objectionable?
'Once we say something like what you're asking for us to say, it'll be like opt-outs for everyone,' said liberal Justice Elena Kagan.
The school district told the court that the books are used like any other in the curriculum: Placed on shelves for students to find and available for teachers to incorporate into reading groups or read-alouds at their discretion. But the parents who object to the books said they are in active use. One challenge with the case is that it reached the Supreme Court before the record was fully developed in lower courts.
The Richmond-based 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the schools 2-1 last year, ruling that the record on how the books were being used was too scant at the early stage of litigation to determine whether the material burdened the religious rights of the parents.
The 6-3 conservative Supreme Court has sided with religious interests in every case it has considered in recent years – allowing a high school football coach to pray on the 50-yard line, permitting taxpayer money to be spent on religious schools and backing a Catholic foster care agency that refused to work with same-sex couples as potential parents.
The parents challenging the policy were represented by the religious legal organization Becket, which has brought several successful cases to the high court in recent years and has more pending.
In that sense, the Montgomery County schools were at a disadvantage before they even entered the courtroom on Tuesday. Kavanaugh seemed to flick at that point shortly before the arguments were over.
'Thank you,' Kavanaugh told Schoenfeld, sympathetically. 'It's a tough case to argue.'
This story has been updated following oral arguments.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Advocates call on Michigan lawmakers to condemn ICE detention of Detroit student
Advocates call on Michigan lawmakers to condemn ICE detention of Detroit student

Yahoo

time38 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Advocates call on Michigan lawmakers to condemn ICE detention of Detroit student

Advocates are calling on Michigan lawmakers and school officials to condemn the immigration arrest of an 18-year-old Western International High School student. (Elaine Cromie / Chalkbeat) This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for Chalkbeat Detroit's free newsletter to keep up with the city's public school system and Michigan education policy. Maykol Bogoya-Duarte, an 18-year-old undocumented immigrant, had planned to return to Colombia with his mother after he graduated from Western International High School. With roughly one semester left in school, Maykol began making arrangements to leave the U.S. But his plans and his education were upended last month when he was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. Instead of finishing out his junior year this week, the teen is in custody of the federal government and faces an 'imminent' risk of deportation, according to his attorney. Immigration advocates are now calling on Michigan's governor, several Democratic members of the state's congressional delegation, and Detroit school district leaders to fight for Maykol's release so he can complete his schooling in the U.S. 'At this time of the year, students should be focused on graduation and summer,' said Ruby Robinson, senior managing attorney with the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, who is representing Maykol. 'And here we have a student on precious time who is being deported. He should be able to finish his studies.' Maykol is only 3.5 credits away from graduating, Robinson said, and would likely be able to finish school around the end of the calendar year. His attorney said he is asking to be released and granted a stay of deportation to see his studies through before returning to Colombia. Maykol was arrested on May 20 after he attempted to join a school field trip to Lake Erie Metropark, about 25 miles from Detroit. While driving with three other students in the car, Maykol was pulled over for tailgating another vehicle, said Robinson. The teen was asked to provide his driver's license but only had a City of Detroit identification card. Michigan does not currently issue driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants. The local police officers who pulled Maykol over could not speak Spanish and had trouble communicating with him, Robinson said, so they called Customs and Border Protection. 'An important aspect of this story is that local police, instead of relying on internal translation services, were relying on Border Patrol agents to interpret for them,' said Robinson. The practice of calling on Border Protection for traffic stops with people who can't speak English could be interpreted as racial profiling, the attorney said. Randy Krause, chief of the Rockwood Police Department, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Maykol, who came to the U.S. at 16, received a final deportation order in 2024. After that, Maykol was working with ICE and the Colombian Consulate to obtain the travel documents he needed to depart the country, according to his attorney. 'We were in compliance with their order,' said Robinson, adding the documents are required in order to board an airplane out of the country. 'It takes time for those documents to be generated.' He was still in the process of arranging to return to Colombia with his mother when he was arrested. It's unclear if he would have been able to graduate before leaving. On Monday afternoon, Robinson and Maykol's family didn't know where he was. They believed he was being moved from the Chippewa County Correctional Facility to another location early Monday morning, the attorney said. 'We expect when he does reach where he will spend the night tonight, we will be able to find him, or he will be able to make a phone call to us or his mom,' said Robinson. The attorney said because of the high number of people detained by ICE, the agency places them wherever bed space is available. 'We're seeing people detained in far parts of Michigan,' he said. 'We're also seeing people being sent to Ohio and other places as well.' By Monday afternoon, nearly 900 people had signed a petition asking Michigan officials to condemn Maykol's arrest, urge for him to be released to complete his high school education, and 'to put preventative policies in place to better support immigrant students and families.' Three advocacy groups — 482Forward, MI Students Dream, and the People's Assembly — created the petition. Lindsey Matson, the deputy director of 482Forward, said the advocacy effort is aimed at raising awareness of the issue and the petition, if it gains traction, will put pressure on those who have the power to intervene. 'Even a statement from the school board will be helpful,' Matson added. The petition calls for action from Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, U.S. Sens. Gary Peters and Elissa Slotkin, U.S. House Reps. Shri Thanedar and Rashida Tlaib, and the Detroit Public Schools Community District. Thanedar, in a Monday evening post on X, formerly Twitter, responded to the detention, saying: 'ICE should not be detaining high schoolers! Maykol Bogoya-Duarte just needs 3 credits to graduate, but was put in detention by ICE. He should be released immediately and allowed to get his diploma.' Nikolai Vitti, superintendent of the district, told Chalkbeat last week that the school system's police department had advocated on the student's behalf. But the district did not notify students and families of the arrest because Maykol was not 'under the protection and responsibility' of the school system when ICE detained him, said Vitti. Robinson said notification about the incident or future instances like it would provide reassurances to families about how the district responds in these situations. 'I think people are looking for something like that from the school district,' said Robinson. In addition to advocating for Maykol's release to allow the teen to finish school, the attorney said the district should ensure its policies and practices support the needs of community members with immigration challenges. That includes making sure students and staff understand their rights in interactions with law enforcement, he added. In New York, the detention of a student has gained widespread attention and calls from advocates and political leaders for his release. (A second teen has since been detained.) Similarly, the detention of a teenager in Massachusetts prompted rallies. Less attention has been paid to Maykol's plight in comparison. Matson said his case isn't less important than what has happened in the other states. 'I feel like Democrats in Michigan have not really stood up for our immigrant population here,' she said. The advocacy groups calling for Maykol's release are asking community members to attend the Detroit Public Schools Community District board meeting at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday at Martin Luther King Jr. High School to urge school leaders to make public statements. Immigration advocates are also encouraging community members to call the offices of state and national lawmakers, as well as ICE. Lori Higgins is the Detroit bureau chief. You can reach her at lhiggins@ Hannah Dellinger covers K-12 education and state education policy for Chalkbeat Detroit. You can reach her at hdellinger@ Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

Detroit's population is growing − a strategy to welcome immigrants helps explain the turnaround
Detroit's population is growing − a strategy to welcome immigrants helps explain the turnaround

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Detroit's population is growing − a strategy to welcome immigrants helps explain the turnaround

A section of Detroit's northeast side has a significant immigrant community. | Ken Coleman By Paul N. McDaniel, Kennesaw State University and Darlene Xiomara Rodriguez, Kennesaw State University Detroit's population grew in 2024 for the second year in a row. This is a remarkable comeback after decades of population decline in the Motor City. What explains the turnaround? One factor may be Detroit's efforts to attract and settle immigrants. These efforts continue despite a dramatic national shift in tone toward new arrivals. This includes executive orders from the second Trump administration targeting immigrant communities, international students and their universities, and cities in which immigrants live. We study urban geography and immigrant integration. Despite these federal policy shifts, our own research and that of others has found that local leaders in cities across the U.S. are actively working to bring immigrants in and help them become part of local communities, generally for economic reasons. Our recent publications on immigrant integration and immigrant community engagement show how and why cities adapt to changes in their population and economies. Detroit and other former immigrant gateway metro areas such as Buffalo, New York; Cleveland, Ohio; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and St. Louis, Missouri experienced significant immigration in the early 20th century. These population booms were followed by a period of decline in immigration numbers. Now these cities are using branding strategies to construct inclusive identities designed to attract and retain immigrants. It may be surprising to think of a city branding itself, but local governments often work with private nonprofits to shape and manage their city's image. They try to build a unique and desirable identity for the city, differentiate it from competitors, and attract new businesses, residents and tourists this way. Here are three reasons why Detroit and other cities want to welcome immigrants: Immigration has a positive impact on the economy, research shows. Local leaders in Detroit recognize that in a global economy, a thriving industrial sector and robust labor market are linked to the contributions of immigrant communities. They also understand that the growth of these communities brings positive economic ripple effects. Immigrants are more likely than the general population to own their own businesses. Organizations such as Global Detroit encourage entrepreneurship through programs such as the Global Talent Retention Initiative, Global Talent Accelerator and Global Entrepreneur in Residence and provide resources for small businesses. Immigrants also fill labor needs, from high-tech fields such as engineering and research to manual labor sectors such as construction and food service. The City of Detroit Office of Immigrant Affairs promotes economic development and immigrant integration through education, English as a second language programs, economic empowerment and community resources. These efforts are paying off by attracting immigrants to the city. This economic impact extends to tourism as well. The region's marketing campaigns embracing diversity shape how visitors perceive the region. The Detroit Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau spotlights the unique experiences the city's diverse neighborhoods offer to tourists. Regional resilience describes a region's ability to withstand and adapt to challenges such as economic shocks and natural disasters. Cities like Detroit that are still trying to bounce back from deindustrialization know from experience how critical this is. Immigration contributes to regional resilience, research shows. In addition to supporting local economies and strengthening the labor force, the arrival of immigrants in Detroit has helped offset native-born population decline, stabilizing the overall population and bolstering local tax bases. According to our analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data, the Detroit-Warren-Dearborn metro area grew by 1.2%, from a total population of 4,291,843 in 2010 to 4,342,304 in 2023. According to U.S. Census Bureau estimates, the Detroit metro area's native-born population decreased by 58,693 people during that 13-year period, while the foreign-born population increased by 109,154. The top five countries of origin for immigrants in the metro area are India, Iraq, Mexico, Yemen and Lebanon. From 2023 to 2024, the metro area's population gained 40,347 immigrants and lost 11,626 native born residents – resulting in a population gain of 28,721. Efforts to welcome immigrants in Detroit and its surrounding communities contributed to this trend of immigrant population growth offsetting overall population decline. Successful place brands are rooted in inclusion and a strong civil society. Detroit's rich tapestry of cultures in areas such as Dearborn and Hamtramck creates a vibrant regional identity. Organizations such as Global Detroit's Welcoming Michigan actively support local grassroots efforts to build mutual respect and ensure that immigrants are able to participate fully in the social, civic and economic fabric of their hometowns. Examples include Global Detroit's Social Cohesion Initiative, Common Bond and Opportunity Neighborhoods. These initiatives help bring neighborhood residents of various backgrounds together to share their cultures, support each other's small businesses and socialize. Such programs strengthen the region's democratic foundations and enhance its appeal as a welcoming and inclusive place to live. Detroit has found that welcoming immigrants and integrating them into the life of the city is one way to navigate the economic, political and cultural challenges it faces. And it is not alone in embracing this strategy. Other cities practicing similar strategies include Baltimore; Boise, Idaho; Charlotte, North Carolina; Dallas; Dayton, Ohio; Louisville, Kentucky; New Orleans; Pittsburgh; Roanoke, Virginia; and Salt Lake City. Although not all cities choose to pursue such strategies, in those that do, local leaders signal a region ready for a globalized future. Paul N. McDaniel, Associate Professor of Geography, Kennesaw State University and Darlene Xiomara Rodriguez, Associate Professor of Social Work and Human Services, Kennesaw State University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Gilbert: Can Trump ignore the courts? Here's what polling shows Americans think
Gilbert: Can Trump ignore the courts? Here's what polling shows Americans think

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Gilbert: Can Trump ignore the courts? Here's what polling shows Americans think

Almost every day now, a new ruling arrives from the federal courts over President Donald Trump's assertion of powers that have not been claimed or used by presidents before him. Some of those rulings have gone Trump's way. Some have gone against him, leading the president and his deputies to lash out at the judiciary and accuse it of overreaching. How does the American public view the simmering Constitutional conflicts between the executive and judicial branches? It's an evolving story, but the polls suggest that in some important ways the public stands more solidly behind the courts than it does the president. Consider these findings from the most recent nationwide poll by the Marquette Law School, taken last month and released May 21: ∎ Americans overwhelmingly recognize the judiciary's role in determining the legality of a president's actions. Asked, 'If the Supreme Court rules against the president in a case, does the president have the power to ignore that ruling, or is the president required to do as the ruling says?' Eighty-four percent of adults say the president must obey the court's ruling. ∎ Asked if court orders temporarily blocking some of Trump's executive actions are a proper use of judicial authority, almost two-thirds (64%) say, 'Yes.' ∎ Asked about Trump's call for the impeachment of federal judges who have ruled against some of his spending freezes and closures of federal agencies, 70% say these judges should not be impeached for such rulings. ∎ Asked about two high-profile immigration-related rulings — one ordering the administration to facilitate the return of a man erroneously deported to El Salvador and the other requiring due process for those being deported — well over 60% of adults supported the high court's rulings against the Trump Administration. On some of these questions, not surprisingly, there is a split between Republicans and people outside the president's party (independents and Democrats). But on others, even Republicans support the courts. Take the broad question of whether Trump can ignore the Supreme Court. There is notably little partisan difference on this: 78% of Republicans, 78% of independents and 93% of Democrats say the president is required to do as the ruling says. Viewed one way, this is not an earth-shattering result. After all, the Constitution gives the courts the authority to decide on the legality of the president's actions. This is plain old civics. But viewed another way, it is a pretty powerful statement, because it is so uncommon these days to find this much agreement across party lines on any high-profile conflict involving this extremely polarizing president. In other words, the prospect of a president ignoring the courts is unappealing even to Trump's core supporters. Of adults who 'strongly approve' of the job Trump is doing, less than a quarter say the president can ignore a Supreme Court ruling, while 76% say he is required to do as the ruling says. On some other questions, a majority of Republicans take Trump's side in these collisions. But even in those cases, support for Trump's position falls far short of his overall approval rating within his party (almost 90%). Instead, a very sizable minority of self-identified Republicans side with the judiciary. Roughly 40% of Republicans say that federal court orders blocking some of Trump's executive actions are a proper use of judicial authority. In the two immigration cases cited above, about 40% of Republicans support the Supreme Court's rulings against Trump. And almost half of Republicans (46%) oppose the call by Trump and his deputies to impeach federal judges who have ruled against the president. One other thing to keep in mind about public opinion in this area is that the Supreme Court is more popular than the president. The court has a net positive rating, Trump has a net negative rating: 53% of adults nationwide approve of the court's performance, while 46% approve of Trump's performance, according to this recent Marquette poll. The court's approval has risen since 2024, while Trump's has declined from its high point at the beginning of his term in January. The court, which has issued rulings in recent years that have pleased (and outraged) both parties, is also far less polarizing than the president. It gets positive ratings from Republicans, who understand that most of the court's members were appointed by GOP presidents. And while it gets much lower ratings from Democrats, those numbers have been improving as the court has come under fire from Trump. The Supreme Court's approval rating among Democrats rose from 19% in January to 31% in May. The polling doesn't tell us how future rulings, or further attacks by Trump on judges, or a deeper constitutional conflict between the president and the courts might affect the public's views of the judiciary in the months and years ahead. It is possible Trump could drive down support for the court within his own party (the polling finds that Republican support is higher for impeaching judges when Trump personally is advocating it than when it is simply members of Congress doing so, a sign of Trump's personal power to move Republican sentiment). But further attacks by Trump on judges are also likely to increase support for the courts outside the president's political base. In Marquette's past four national surveys dating back to last fall, the polling has consistently shown that a huge majority of Americans recognize the courts' role in refereeing disputes over executive power. And so far, that has not been dented by the president's attacks on the courts' actions, motivations and authority. Craig Gilbert provides Wisconsin political analysis as a fellow with Marquette University Law School's Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education. Prior to the fellowship, Gilbert reported on politics for 35 years at the Journal Sentinel, the last 25 in its Washington Bureau. His column continues that independent reporting tradition and goes through the established Journal Sentinel editing him on Twitter: @Wisvoter. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Trump defying the courts? Here's where the public stands in polling

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store