In a 6-3 decision on Mahmoud v. Taylor, the Supreme Court ruled that parents can opt their young children out of sexuality and gender instruction in school based on their religious beliefs. The court's three liberal judges dissented. This is a major win for religious freedom. 

Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the court has "long recognized the rights of parents to direct ‘the religious upbringing’ of their children" and that forcing this type of education without notifying parents or allowing them to opt out "does interfere with the children's religious development and imposes a burden on religious exercise."

In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that "Public schools, this Court has said, are 'at once the symbol of our democracy and the most pervasive means for promoting our common destiny.' They offer to children of all faiths and backgrounds an education and an opportunity to practice living in our multicultural society. That experience is critical to our Nation’s civic vitality. Yet it will become a mere memory if children must be insulated from exposure to ideas and concepts that may conflict with their parents’ religious beliefs."

Here's the backstory: 

In 2022, the Montgomery County Board of Education in Maryland began adding LGBT+ books to its elementary school curriculum. The books were used in grades pre-kindergarten through fifth grade. Initially, parents could opt their children out of lessons that used the books, but so many parents wanted to opt out that the school board stopped allowing it and insisted that every child must participate, stating concerns about attendance, the ability for school staff to administer opt-outs, and the "risk of exposing students who believe the storybooks represent them and their families to social stigma and isolation."  

This didn't sit right with several parents, and rightfully so. Over 1,000 parents signed a petition, and they flooded school board meetings, but the district did not budge. 

In May 2023, three couples with children in Montgomery County elementary schools sued the Montgomery County Board of Education, claiming that it was violating their First Amendment rights. Each of the couples comes from a different religious background and claims that forcing their children to study gender and sexuality in elementary school violates their religious freedom. They demanded that the school notify parents when such books were read or discussed in the classroom and allow parents the ability for their children to opt out. 

The school board claims that the parents simply want to opt out because they find the material offensive and that it has zero to do with their religious beliefs.  

The parents are Tamer Mahmoud and Enas Barakat, who are Muslim; Chris and Melissa Persak, who are Roman Catholic; and Jeff and Svitlana Roman, who are Roman Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox. Between them, they have four children in the school system. 

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments for the case on April 22, 2025. Here's the official question presented:  

Respondent Montgomery County Board of Education requires elementary school teachers to read their students storybooks celebrating gender transitions, Pride parades, and same-sex playground romance. The storybooks were chosen to disrupt "cisnormativity" and "either/or thinking" among students. The Board's own principals objected that the curriculum was "not appropriate for the intended age group," presented gender ideology as "fact," "sham[ed]" students with contrary opinions, and was "dismissive of religious beliefs." The Board initially allowed parents to opt their kids out but then reversed course, saying that no opt-outs would be permitted and that parents would not even be notified when the storybooks were read.

Petitioners filed suit, not challenging the curriculum, but arguing that compelling their elementary-age children to participate in instruction contrary to their parents' religious convictions violated the Free Exercise Clause. Construing Wisconsin v. Yoder, the Fourth Circuit found no free-exercise burden because no one was forced "to change their religious beliefs or conduct."

The question presented is: Do public schools burden parents' religious exercise when they compel elementary school children to participate in instruction on gender and sexuality against their parents' religious convictions and with-out notice or opportunity to opt out?