Supreme Court to Decide Whether Maryland Parents Can Withdraw Children from Pro-LGBT Storybooks
Last year, the Fourth Circuit ruled against the parents, concluding that there was insufficient evidence to support claims of violations of their constitutional rights.
On January 17, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider a request from a group of Maryland parents seeking to allow their young children to opt out of storybooks that promote LGBT lifestyles.
The petition was submitted on September 12, 2024, following the dismissal of the parents’ request for an injunction by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which sought to prevent the Montgomery County Board of Education from implementing its policy promoting the books.
The situation stems from a November 2022 directive from the board mandating the inclusion of new “LGBTQ-inclusive” storybooks for elementary students that endorse themes such as gender transitions, Pride parades, and same-sex relationships among young children.
According to the petition, the board instructed staff tasked with book selection to apply an “LGBTQ+ Lens” and assess whether notions of “cisnormativity,” “stereotypes,” and “power hierarchies” were being “reinforced or disrupted.”
Initially, parents were informed they could opt out on behalf of their children during storytime, but the board revised its policy in March 2023, stating that beginning in the 2023–2024 academic year, the opt-out option would no longer be available.
Related Stories
The petition highlighted that if parents disagreed with the curriculum provided to their elementary school-aged children, their only alternatives were to enroll them in private schools or to homeschool them.
Numerous parents, predominantly from Eastern Orthodox Christian and Muslim backgrounds, attended board meetings to voice their concerns, citing their religious beliefs that prohibit exposing young children to teachings about gender and sexuality that conflict with their faith.
After “parents stressed the impressionability of young children and their inability to independently evaluate such nuanced and sensitive topics,” board members accused them of inciting “hate,” comparing them to “white supremacists” and “xenophobes,” according to the petition.
The parents initiated legal action after the board rejected their requests, claiming a constitutional right to opt out of such education.
On August 24, 2023, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman denied their request for an injunction to prevent the discontinuation of the opt-out policy.
Furthermore, the panel concluded that there was no indication that the policy change infringed upon the parents’ rights to freely exercise their religion.
Eric Baxter, vice president and senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, representing the parents, expressed support for the Supreme Court’s decision to take up the case.
“Imposing controversial gender ideology on 3-year-olds without parental consent is a violation of our nation’s traditions, parental rights, and basic human decency.
“It’s imperative that the Court clarifies that parents—not the state—should determine how and when to introduce sensitive matters regarding gender and sexuality to their children,” he stated.
As of now, it remains uncertain when the Supreme Court will hear this case.
The Epoch Times attempted to reach out for comments from Alan Schoenfeld of Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale, and Dorr, the attorney representing the Montgomery County Board of Education, but did not receive a response prior to publication.
