A historic victory for parental rights in Maryland and across America has sent a resounding message that parents, not government, make the final decision in the moral and religious rearing of their children. In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the Supreme Court ruled that Maryland parents, over religious reasons, can opt their children out of reading lessons using LGBT-themed books.
In a 6-3 ruling, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.
Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, sided with the parents. “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. ... And a government cannot condition the benefit of free public education on parents’ acceptance of such instruction.’”
Justice Sotomayor, writing for the minority, expressed concern that religious opt-outs “will impose impossible administrative burdens on schools.” Her statement, “Today’s ruling threatens the very essence of public education,” indicates concern that the majority ruling gives way too much power to parents over what children are taught.
The case stems from a legal challenge by several parents in Maryland’s Montgomery County Public Schools after the district added books with LGBT themes to its K–5 language arts curriculum in 2022. The school district allowed students to opt out of the lessons but later reneged, allegedly because there were too many requests. Why did they continue to include the radicalized sexual content when so many taxpayers objected? Why did Sotomayor side with schools against parents?
The majority ruling lays the foundation for nationwide religious opt-outs. Nearly half of K–12 teachers support religious opt-outs for LGBT lessons, according to a Pew Research Center study.
Parents have the right to expect the public school to provide a state-mandated academic education rather than perverse sexual content. They should not have to resort to courts to affirm their parental rights to have the final say in the education of their children.
Given that many educators have been indoctrinated by Marxist teacher colleges, we can expect schools to continue to use the classroom — even through subversive tactics — to impose their radical views on young children while ignoring the SCOTUS decision.
This brings to mind another Supreme Court ruling that has been ignored. The 1925 case that laid the cornerstone for parental rights, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, affirmed that parents, not the government, have the responsibility to rear and educate their children. This decision set a precedent that has shaped legal interpretations of parental rights in education and beyond.
Opting out of politicized lessons does not solve the underlying problem. We have to look to the efforts of the globalist communist United Nations to remove parental influence over the education and worldviews of their children. Since that is not going to change, neither will government efforts to seize control of children.
Rather than continue to fight government schools, parents are choosing to walk away. It comes as no surprise that enrollment in private schools and homeschools is exploding.
Carole Hornsby Haynes: Education policy analyst, curriculum consultant, historian, and classical pianist. www.drcarolehhaynes.com.
Image: jarmoluk via Pixabay, Pixabay License.