The Right-Wing Movement Taking Over Public Schools

Buzz Feed

12 hours ago

Across the United States, more parents are growing concerned as they witness a narrow religious ideology gaining influence over their children's public schools.
While some argue that inclusive school curricula are threatening their religious freedom, many others are worried that one belief system is being imposed — dictating not only which books are available in classrooms but who gets to be represented in the school experience.
The battle over books, especially those centering LGBTQ+ lives and diverse identities, has become a larger conflict about who controls the definition of American childhood and which values shape that narrative.
'The question emerging in the law right now is: Which parents have rights?' Jessica Mason Pieklo, Senior Vice President and Executive Editor of Rewire News Group, told HuffPost. 'We're seeing the conservative legal movement rally around a narrow vision of parental identity, control, and rights, one that doesn't reflect or include all families.'
Education, once a shared public good, is increasingly becoming a battleground. And at the center of it is a Supreme Court case that could have far-reaching consequences: Mahmoud v. Taylor, which challenged the inclusion of LGBTQ+ books in a Maryland school district.
In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the Supreme Court blocked a Maryland school district's LGBTQ+-inclusive curriculum, ruling it posed a 'very real threat' to the religious beliefs of some parents and supporting their right to opt their children out of such instruction.
While the ruling doesn't impose a nationwide ban, it opens the door for local challenges that can limit educators' ability to provide diverse and inclusive education. For parents, this means the fight is about whose voices are heard in their communities.
'This isn't a book ban case,' explains Kelly Jensen, award-winning author and editor at Book Riot. 'It's a case about education and religious rights. None of the books are being banned or pulled from curricula. The real issue is the chilling effect.'
Teachers, already working under immense pressure, may now think twice before including LGBTQ+ books in classrooms, even if those books are age-appropriate and affirming. 'The silent erasure of books, disappearing from shelves without formal challenges, is as insidious as outright bans,' Jensen warns.
The ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor didn't change the law outright, but it signaled a cultural shift. One where certain religious beliefs are being elevated above others.
The uproar over inclusive books in schools isn't a spontaneous, grassroots movement; it's a carefully coordinated effort. 'These book bans are astroturfed,' Pieklo said. 'They don't bubble up organically in a community because there's overwhelming concern that some inappropriate material has been placed there. These are part of a larger advocacy campaign.'
Despite the noise, most families support inclusive curricula and occupy a middle ground, favoring opt-out options for personal or religious objections without imposing blanket bans that restrict access for everyone else.
According to Pieklo, these efforts to flood schools with opt-outs are part of a broader conservative legal strategy aimed at undermining public education and controlling what students learn, particularly around race, gender, and history.
'This isn't about free speech or parental choice,' she said. 'It's about using the power of the law to try and direct outcomes.'
And those outcomes are already changing. The 11th Circuit Court recently upheld a Florida law that prevents teachers from using students' preferred pronouns, mandating that they refer to students only by their sex assigned at birth. The court even ruled that misgendering students is protected speech.
The religious justification being used in these cases isn't general, it's specific. 'The ruling essentially says religion is more important than your identity, and not just any religion, but specific types of religious interpretations,' Pieklo explains.
In oral arguments for Mahmoud, conservative justices grossly distorted the nature of inclusive books. Justice Neil Gorsuch even described Pride Puppy, a board book about a child attending a Pride parade, as 'a bondage manual for kindergartners.'
For many families, the cultural and legal battles over school curricula aren't abstract; they're deeply personal.
'My kids are older now,' Pieklo said, 'but it is very important for me and my family that our children have access to, not just exposure, but access to, books, information, resources, materials that explain not just the world around them but a world they may or may not feel 100% a part of. That helps them understand and navigate shifting understandings of identity.'
That sense of wanting children to see and understand the world in its full complexity is shared by other parents across the country. Stephanie, a mother from North Carolina, echoes the importance of broad exposure: 'I'm a Christian and I want my kids to learn about the world as it is, not just through the lens of our faith.'
Katie, a public school teacher and parent, said she's horrified by efforts to limit what kids can learn.
'I want my kids to learn as much about the world as they can, and I know I can't teach them everything. I trust that they can handle hearing viewpoints that differ from their own.'
That trust in students' ability to think critically is matched by a strong belief in the power of representation. Mindi, a former teacher, reflects on how she would approach things if she were still in the classroom.
'I would have integrated books with secondary characters who identify as LGBTQ — not for 'indoctrination,' but to support my students with other identities. No book bans, ever.'
For some, like Denise, a mother in Pennsylvania, the issue goes even deeper — into questions of visibility and belonging.
'I think it's disgusting that LGBTQ+ is being erased from our children's education,' she said. 'These are real people with real and valid ways to love. Taking it out of schools means my kids will always think it's taboo to love who they love.'
"We All Lose Something"
Underlying all of these perspectives is a shared concern about whose values are shaping what's taught, and whose voices are being silenced.
'When one religious ideology dictates what can be taught, read, or affirmed in public schools, we all lose something,' Pieklo notes.
As public schools face funding cuts and increasing pressure, decisions like Mahmoud v. Taylor hand a louder platform to a narrow, often extreme religious agenda that can then shape what every child is allowed to learn, regardless of their own parents' wishes. Though these rulings claim to protect parental rights, some parents feel they frequently silence and disenfranchise those who want their children to see themselves reflected in their education and to understand the rich diversity of the world around them.
Megan, a mother of children in public schools, puts it even more bluntly: 'Religion does not belong in schools. I do not enforce or force my beliefs on other people's children. And I'm incredibly not okay with one religion being forced on mine in a 'free' country.'
The deeper issue, some parents argue, is the widening gap between well-funded private religious schools and under-resourced public ones.
Jensen warns that unless communities push back, this divide will only deepen: 'This ruling might fuel the expansion of voucher programs, pushing public funds toward private religious education,' she said. 'It divides the 'haves' from the 'have-nots.' And it hurts public schools that already struggle for funding.'
Megan echoes that concern, pointing to the strain on her children's school, where the teachers' union has had to fight for basics like smaller class sizes and fair pay. 'They deserve help — not funding cuts and more pressure on an already struggling system.'