The United States Supreme Court, in a decision of 6-3, failed in favor of parents who seek to opt for their children in the public school instruction that conflicts with sincerely sustained religious beliefs.
The case, presented by a group of Christian, Muslim and Jewish parents from Montgomery County, Maryland, sought a guaranteed exemption from reading the classroom of stories books with LGBTQ songs, including same -sex marriage and the exploration of gender identity.
Liberal judges Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson cast the dissident votes in the 6-3 Decision.
Judge Samuel Alito, writing for the court, said in the decision that refusing to allow parents to opt for their children from the instruction that “raises a very real threat of undermining their religious beliefs and practices” violates the protections of the first amendment for religious exercise.
The “Introduction of the Montgomery County Board of the Tales Books’ LGBTQ+Included ‘, along with its decision to retain Opt Outs, places an unconstitutional burden on parents’ rights over the free exercise of their religion,” said Alito.
The Court determined that parents are also likely to succeed in their lawsuit for free exercise claims, and have shown that they have the right to a preliminary court while their claim continues.
In his dissent, Sotomayor accused the court of inventing a “constitutional right to avoid exposure to subtle issues contrary to religious principles that parents want to instill in their children.”
A police officer of the US Supreme Court. UU. He is located at the clock outside the Supreme Court, on June 26, 2025, in Washington.
Mariam Zuhaib/AP
In 2022, after introducing several books with LGBTQ themes in its language arts curriculum, the Montgomery County School Board allowed parents to opt for not participating if the content was considered objectable as a matter of faith. A year later, the officials reversed the course and said that an exclusion program had become difficult to handle and was contrary to inclusion values.
The parents alleged that the use of books in a primary school curriculum, without the opportunity to be excused, is equivalent to indoctrination led by the Government on sensitive matters of sexuality. The school board insisted that books simply expose children to various points of view and ideas.
Waiting for the completion of the legal challenge, the School Board “must be ordered to notify in advance every time one of the books in question or any other similar book is used in some way and allows them to be excused from that instruction,” Alito wrote.
The conservative majority of the Supreme Court indicated during the oral arguments in April that it was ready to establish a right of parents to choose not to participate in sensitive subjects, saying that it should be common sense.
