Supreme Court backs parents in Maryland to opt out of LGBTQ+ education

In a significant ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with a group of parents in Maryland, allowing them to opt their children out of school lessons featuring LGBTQ+ themed books. This decision was part of the Mahmoud v. Taylor case, where a religious group of Muslim and Christian parents challenged Montgomery County Public Schools over the new curriculum that included literature about diverse sexual orientations and gender identities. The ruling, which occurred on June 27, 2025, was a response to the parents' claims that the mandatory inclusion of these books violated their religious freedoms. The conservative majority of the court, in a 6-3 decision, concluded that government policies which mandatorily expose children to lessons contradicting their parents' religious beliefs impose an unconstitutional burden on parental rights. Justice Samuel Alito noted that it violates the rights of parents to direct the religious upbringing of their children under the First Amendment. The books under scrutiny, which were initially introduced by the school district in 2022 with the aim to reflect a diverse society, included stories with LGBTQ+ characters. The school board, however, decided to revoke the opt-out option because they claimed it was disruptive. The parents, drawn from various faith backgrounds, argued that the material not only conflicted with their beliefs but also pushed the boundaries of age appropriateness for their children. They expressed concerns that allowing the schools to dictate lessons imposed a significant threat not only to their religious rights but also to their children's upbringing. The Supreme Court's ruling allows parents to be given notice before such books are included in lessons and to opt their children out from attending those lessons. While the conservative justices highlighted the need for parents to maintain authority over their children's education, the liberal justices cautioned that this decision could create extensive administrative burdens on public schools and cause chaos within the system. They expressed worries that the ruling encourages parents to opt out of all lessons that conflict with their beliefs, further fragmenting the educational landscape. The potential consequences of this ruling extend beyond Montgomery County. Critics argue that it sets a dangerous precedent, emboldening parents nationwide to challenge school curricula they find objectionable, particularly those related to LGBTQ+ topics. This move aligns with broader debates about parental rights in education, often intensified in recent years amid cultural and political polarization regarding issues of gender and sexuality in educational settings. With the ruling being viewed as a significant victory for religious freedoms, it reflects a growing movement within the Supreme Court to support parental control over children's education, potentially reshaping the landscape of public education in America.