'Let us be the parents': Supreme Court should let parents opt kids out of LGBTQ school lessons, lawyer argues
Counsel representing a coalition of parents fighting for the choice to opt their children out of LGBTQ-related curriculum says the case is about letting parents "be the parents."
"We're just saying if the school board is going to make that decision, let us have the chance to leave the classroom," Colten Stanberry, counsel at Becket and attorney for the parents bringing the suit, told Fox News Digital. "And so I think for my parent clients, they're saying let us be the parents. Keep us involved in the school decision-making process. Don't try to cut us out."
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in parents' fight to opt their children out of LGBTQ-related curriculum.
The issue at hand in the case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, is whether parents have a right to be informed about and to then opt their children out of reading books in elementary schools that conflict with their faith.
Maryland Mom Taking Fight To Opt Child Out Of Lgbtq Story Books Before Supreme Court
"Our case is not a book ban case," Stanberry emphasized.
Read On The Fox News App
"We're not saying that these books can't be on the shelves. We're saying we want to be out of the class," Stanberry continued. "And we're also not saying that teachers can't teach this material."
A coalition of Jewish, Christian and Muslim parents with elementary school children in Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland brought suit against the school board after it introduced new LGBTQ books into the curriculum as part of the district's "inclusivity" initiative. The curriculum change came after the state of Maryland enacted regulations seeking to promote "educational equity," according to the petitioner's brief filed with the high court.
The school board introduced books that featured transgender and non-binary characters and storylines, according to the brief.
The parents' coalition stated in its brief that the Board "initially honored parental opt-outs in accordance with its own Guidelines and Maryland law" after parents raised concerns over the new curriculum. After the board issued a public statement in line with this stance, the petitioners stated that the board "reversed course" without prior notice.
"Without explanation, it announced that beginning with the 2023-2024 school year, '[s]tudents and families may not choose to opt out' and will not be informed when 'books are read,'" the brief reads.
Scotus Rulings This Term Could Strengthen Religious Rights Protections, Expert Says
The parents sued the school board, arguing that the denial of notice and opt-outs "violated the Free Exercise Clause by overriding their freedom to direct the religious upbringing of their children and by burdening their religious exercise via policies that are not neutral or generally applicable," petitioners wrote.
The parents cited Wisconsin v. Yoder, a 1972 Supreme Court case, to support their argument. In Yoder, the Court held that a state law requiring children to attend school past eighth grade violated the parents' constitutional rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to direct their children's religious upbringings.
Stanberry says that while this case is much narrower than Yoder, the issue at hand is "a right parents have had from the Supreme Court for over 50 years."
The school board argued in its brief, "The record contains no evidence that teachers have been or will be 'directed' or 'instructed' to inject any views about gender or sexuality into classroom discussions about the storybooks."
The school board writes that the storybooks were "offered as an option for literature circles, book clubs, or reading groups; or used for read-alouds."
"Teachers are not required to use any of the storybooks in any given lesson, and were not provided any associated mandatory discussion points, classroom activities, or assignments," the brief continued.
The lower court denied the parents' motion, finding that they could not show "'that the no-opt-out policy burdens their religious exercise.'"
On appeal to the Fourth Circuit, the appeals court affirmed the district court's decision, with the majority holding that the parents had not shown how the policy violated the First Amendment.
Supreme Court Appears Likely To Side With Catholic Church And Trump In Key Religious Exemption Case
Despite the lower court proceedings, Stanberry shared they are "hopeful and excited" as the high court considers the case.
"We think this court will really consider the case," Stanberry said ahead of Tuesday's arguments. "Obviously, I don't have a crystal ball. I can't predict how it's going to come out, but we're feeling good going into it."
In a statement to Fox News Digital, the school board said its policy "is grounded in our commitment to provide an appropriate classroom environment for all of our students," saying the board believes "a curriculum that fosters respect for people of different backgrounds does not burden the free exercise of religion."
"Based on established law, as discussed in our brief and by our counsel at today's argument, we believe the Supreme Court can and should affirm the lower courts' rulings," Liliana López, Public Information Officer for the public schools, said. "Regardless of the outcome, we are grateful for the opportunity to have our case heard by the highest court in the land. We await the Court's decision."
The case comes at a time when President Donald Trump and his administration have prioritized educational and DEI-related reform upon starting his second term. The Supreme Court has notably also heard oral arguments this past term in other religious liberty and gender-related suits.
"I think that this case could be seen as people of faith coming forward and saying, 'Hey, we want to be accommodated in this pluralistic society. So, I think it's coming at an opportune moment," Stanberry said.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in mid-January during its 2024-2025 term.
Fox News' Bill Mears, Shannon Bream, and Kristine Parks contributed to this report. Original article source: 'Let us be the parents': Supreme Court should let parents opt kids out of LGBTQ school lessons, lawyer argues
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
23 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Political violence is threaded through recent U.S. history. The motives and justifications vary
The assassination of one Democratic Minnesota state lawmaker and her husband and the shooting of another lawmaker and his wife at their homes are just the latest addition to a long and unsettling roll call of political violence in the United States. The list, in the last two months alone: the killing of two Israeli Embassy staffers in Washington, D.C.; the firebombing of a Colorado march calling for the release of Israeli hostages; and the firebombing of the official residence of Pennsylvania's governor — on a Jewish holiday while he and his family were inside. Here is a sampling of other attacks before that — the assassination of a healthcare executive on the streets of New York City late last year; the attempted assassination of Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally during his presidential campaign last year; the 2022 attack on the husband of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) by a believer in right-wing conspiracy theories; and the 2017 shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) by a gunman at a congressional softball game practice. 'We've entered into this especially scary time in the country where it feels the sort of norms and rhetoric and rules that would tamp down on violence have been lifted,' said Matt Dallek, a political scientist at Georgetown University who studies extremism. 'A lot of people are receiving signals from the culture.' Politics have also driven large-scale massacres. Gunmen who killed 11 worshipers at a synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018, 23 shoppers at a heavily Latino Walmart in El Paso in 2019 and 10 Black people at a Buffalo, N.Y., grocery store in 2022 each cited the conspiracy theory that a secret cabal of Jews was trying to replace white people with people of color. That has become a staple on parts of the right that support Trump's push to limit immigration. The Anti-Defamation League found that from 2022 through 2024, all of the 61 political killings in the United States were committed by right-wing extremists. That changed on the first day of 2025, when a Texas man flying the flag of the Islamic State group killed 14 people by driving his truck through a crowded New Orleans street before being fatally shot by police. 'You're seeing acts of violence from all different ideologies,' said Jacob Ware, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who researches terrorism. 'It feels more random and chaotic and more frequent.' The United States has a long and grim history of political violence, including presidential assassinations dating to the killing of President Abraham Lincoln, lynchings and other violence aimed at Black people in the South, and the 1954 shooting inside Congress by four Puerto Rican nationalists. Experts say the last few years, however, have reached a level not seen since the tumultuous days of the 1960s and 1970s, when political leaders the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., President Kennedy, Malcolm X and Robert F. Kennedy were assassinated. Ware noted that the most recent surge comes after the new Trump administration has closed units that focus on investigating white supremacist extremism and pushed federal law enforcement to spend less time on anti-terrorism and more on detaining people who are in the country illegally. 'We're at the point, after these six weeks, where we have to ask about how effectively the Trump administration is combating terrorism,' Ware said. One of Trump's first acts in office was to pardon those involved in the largest act of domestic political violence this century — the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol by a pro-Trump mob intended to prevent Congress from certifying Trump's 2020 election loss. Those pardons broadcast a signal to would-be extremists on either side of the political debate, Dallek said: 'They sent a very strong message that violence, as long as you're a Trump supporter, will be permitted and may be rewarded.' Often, those who engage in political violence don't have clearly defined ideologies that easily map onto the country's partisan divides. A man who died after he detonated a car bomb outside a Palm Springs fertility clinic last month left writings urging people not to procreate and expressed what the FBI called 'nihilistic ideations.' But each political attack seems to inspire partisans to find evidence the attacker is on the other side. Little was known about the man police identified as a suspect in the Minnesota attacks, 57-year-old Vance Boelter. Authorities say they found a list of other apparent targets that included other Democratic officials, abortion clinics and abortion rights advocates, as well as fliers for the day's anti-Trump 'No Kings' parades. Conservatives online seized on the fliers — and the fact that Boelter had apparently once been reappointed to a state workforce development board by Democratic Gov. Tim Walz — to claim the suspect must be a liberal. 'The far left is murderously violent,' billionaire Elon Musk posted on his social media site, X. It was reminiscent of the fallout from the attack on Paul Pelosi, the former House speaker's then-82-year-old husband, who was seriously injured by a man wielding a hammer. Right-wing figures falsely theorized the assailant was a secret lover rather than what authorities said he was: a believer in pro-Trump conspiracy theories who broke into the Pelosi home echoing Jan. 6 rioters who broke into the Capitol by saying: 'Where is Nancy?!' No prominent Republican ever denounced the Pelosi assault, and GOP leaders including Trump joked about the attack at public events in its aftermath. On Saturday, Nancy Pelosi posted a statement on X decrying the Minnesota attack. 'All of us must remember that it's not only the act of violence, but also the reaction to it, that can normalize it,' she wrote. After mocking the Pelosis after the 2022 attack, Trump on Saturday joined in the bipartisan condemnation of the Minnesota shootings, calling them 'horrific violence.' The president has, however, consistently broken new ground with his bellicose rhetoric toward his political opponents, whom he routinely calls 'sick' and 'evil,' and has talked repeatedly about how violence is needed to quell protests. The Minnesota attack occurred after Trump took the extraordinary step of mobilizing the military to try to control protests against his administration's immigration operations in Los Angeles during the last week, when he pledged to 'HIT' disrespectful protesters and warned of a 'migrant invasion' of the city. Dallek said Trump has been 'both a victim and an accelerant' of the charged, dehumanizing political rhetoric that is flooding the country. 'It feels as if the extremists are in the saddle,' he said, 'and the extremists are the ones driving our rhetoric and politics.' Riccardi writes for the Associated Press.
New York Post
34 minutes ago
- New York Post
Israel under attack from Iran yet again — as ballistic missiles target Jewish state
Iran has fired another volley of ballistic missiles towards Israel, with sirens ringing across the Jewish state as residents are warned to remain in shelters. The Israel Defense Forces said its 'defensive systems are operating to intercept the threat' following Tehran's latest retaliatory attack on Sunday afternoon. Israeli air defence systems are activated to intercept Iranian missiles over the city of Haifa on June 15, 2025. AFP via Getty Images 'The public is instructed to enter a protected space and remain there until further notice,' the IDF statement said. At least four people were injured after one of the downed missiles landed in southern Israel, the Times of Israel reported.
New York Post
39 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump warns America ‘could get involved' directly in Israel-Iran conflict
President Trump warned Sunday that the US could get directly involved in the Israel-Iran conflict if things continue to escalate. While Trump predicted that Iran and Israel will 'make a deal' to end the deadly violence that has seen the Jewish state and Islamic republic exchange countless missiles since Friday, the president said the US may find itself involved if a truce doesn't happen. 'We're not involved in it. It's possible we could get involved. But we are not at this moment involved,' Trump told ABC News. 3 President Trump said Sunday that the US could get directly involved in the war between Israel and Iran. via REUTERS Advertisement 3 Iran continues to launch waves of retaliatory attacks on Tel Aviv after Israel's preemptive attack on it Friday. ATEF SAFADI/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock Trump suggested that his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, could serve as a mediator between Israel and Iran, both of which the Kremlin has maintained relations. 'He is ready. He called me about it. We had a long talk about it. We talked about this more than his situation,' Trump said, referring to Putin's ongoing war in Ukraine. 'This is something I believe is going to get resolved.' Advertisement Despite Trump's denial that the US is already involved in the Mideast conflict, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told reporters in Tehran on Sunday that it is clear Israel has been coordinating its attacks with the 'agreement and support of the United States. 'We have received messages from the US through various channels over the past two days stating that the US had no involvement and will have no involvement in this attack,' he said. 'As I said, we don't believe the US's claim.' 3 Smoke billows over Tehran during a wave of Israeli airstrikes Sunday. AFP via Getty Images Advertisement As the attacks between Israel and Iran escalate, the US State Department said it has authorized the 'voluntary departure of family members and some non-emergency U.S. government employees' from Israel. 'US citizens who wish to depart should not delay in taking advantage of commercial transportation options,' the State Department said in a memo, adding that the embassy's shelter-in-place order remains in effect until further notice. With Post wires
