Newsletter
Newsletter Support JNS

Parents have right to opt students out of ‘LGBTQ+ inclusive’ texts, Supreme Court rules

“Parents have the right to raise their children how they see fit, and this includes how and when to expose them to certain topics,” said the chair of the House education panel.

Supreme Court of the United States
“The Authority of Law” statue, which sits on the west side of the U.S. Supreme Court building, in Washington, D.C. Credit: Matt H. Wade via Wikipedia Commons.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Friday that parents have the right to opt their children out of reading books in public school that push a particular view on gender and sexuality.

“A government burdens the religious exercise of parents when it requires them to submit their children to instruction that poses ‘a very real threat of undermining’ the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill,” wrote Samuel Alito, an associate justice on the high court, in the majority opinion.

“A government cannot condition the benefit of free public education on parents’ acceptance of such instruction,” Alito wrote. “Based on these principles, we conclude that the parents are likely to succeed in their challenge to the board’s policies.”

The case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, centered on the Montgomery County, Md., education board’s introduction of a “LGBTQ+ inclusive” book in its elementary-school curriculum.

“These books, and associated educational instructions provided to teachers, are designed to ‘disrupt’ children’s thinking about sexuality and gender,” Alito wrote. “The board has told parents that it will not give them notice when the books are going to be used and that their children’s attendance during those periods is mandatory.”

A group of parents, from different faiths, sued the school board.

Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), chair of the House Education and Workforce Committee, stated that the high court’s decision “is a victory for both parental rights and religious freedom.”

“Parents have the right to raise their children how they see fit, and this includes how and when to expose them to certain topics,” Walberg stated. “I stand firmly with the parents of Montgomery County and across the country who are rejecting this dangerous idea that they should be sidelined from their children’s education.”

“Parents know their children best and should always have a seat at the table when it comes to what their kids are taught,” he said.

“This is a historic victory for parental rights in Maryland and across America,” said Eric Baxter, vice president and senior counsel at Becket.

“Kids shouldn’t be forced into conversations about drag queens, pride parades or gender transitions without their parents’ permission,” Baxter said. “Today, the court restored common sense and made clear that parents, not government, have the final say in how their children are raised.”

See more from JNS Staff
Rabbi Zushe Cunin, of the Chabad Jewish Community Center of Pacific Palisades, told JNS that there has been “tremendous anxiety” in the community over Bruce Lion’s behavior.
“At our own endorsement meeting, when asked to condemn Hamas and its Oct. 7th attacks, she point-blank refused, turning the question into yet another attack on Israel,” the Broadway Democrats wrote about their decision not to endorse Darializa Avila Chavelier, who is running for Congress in New York.
“Even if any Arab or Palestinian thinks that injustice has befallen them because of the existence of the state of Israel, moving on and forgetting about the injustice is much more in their interest than looking backwards,” Hussain Abdul-Hussain, author of The Arab Case for Israel, told JNS.
A month after his father was killed in a Queens park, Tzvi Yonie Itzkowitz told JNS that his family believes that the still-unsolved killing was motivated by Jew-hatred.
“The gravity of the situation and its widespread impact on our school community make this not the right time for a celebration,” the school stated in an email to parents.
The department said New York may be unlawfully discriminating against religious organizations by requiring long-term care facilities to accommodate residents based on gender identity without providing comparable faith-based exemptions.