On Friday, the Supreme Court sided with a group of Muslim, Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox parents in Maryland asking for the right to opt-out their children from instruction that violates and disparages their religious beliefs by indoctrinating students with LGBTQ+ sexual ideology.
The parents are suing Montgomery County Public Schools for incorporating books into their preschool through 12th grade language arts curriculum that feature and promote "lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer characters." The lawsuit contends that the books and instruction violate parents’ constitutional right to freedom of religion.
And, because the Maryland school board is refusing to allow them to opt-out their children while the lawsuit proceeds through the appellate process, the parents petitioned the Supreme Court for an injunction.
The Supreme Court ruled that the parents are entitled to a temporary injunction because they have shown that:
- They are likely to ultimately succeed on the merits of their case.
- They are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief.
- The balance of equities tips in their favor.
- An injunction would be in the public interest.
"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," Justice Samuel Alito wrote, presenting the majority opinion of the 6-3 decision.
"And a government cannot condition the benefit of free public education on parents’ acceptance of such instruction," Alito explained.
Since the books promote "gender transitions, Pride parades, and same-sex playground romance," they create "indirect pressure to forgo a religious practice," the parents say.
The storybooks convey a normative message on the subjects of sex and gender that contradicts the beliefs of many Americans, the decision explains:
“Many Americans, like the parents in this case, believe that biological sex reflects divine creation, that sex and gender are inseparable, and that children should be encouraged to accept their sex and to live accordingly.”
“The storybooks, however, suggest that it is hurtful, and perhaps even hateful, to hold the view that gender is inextricably bound with biological sex,” the ruling explain, noting that the that parents contend that the books impose upon their children a set of values and beliefs that are hostile to their beliefs.
The books exert upon children a psychological pressure to confirm to faith-denying viewpoints, the parents charge.
What’s more, the school board “has specifically encouraged teachers to reinforce this viewpoint and to reprimand any children who disagree,” the majority opinion notes.
“That goes far beyond mere “exposure,” Alito writes:
“We reject this chilling vision of the power of the state to strip away the critical right of parents to guide the religious development of their children.”