It’s happening in public schools.
Maybe in your neighborhood.
Kindergarten kids learning about sex in English class.
LGBTQ+ storybooks for 5-year-olds.
Christian parents want to be able to opt out their kids.
Montgomery County, Maryland school board said no.
The U.S. Supreme Court said yes, they can… a huge win.
Here are 7 facts you should know:
Fact #1: The school board deliberately chooses books to contradict parents’ views – and indoctrinate the kids.
The Montgomery County school board had millions of storybooks for kids to choose from for their language arts curriculum.
Instead, they chose books like “Pride Puppy!” and “Born Ready” for pre-school-age children.[1]
These books introduce sexual concepts such as gender transitions, LGBTQ-Pride events and pronoun choices.
The schoolboard chose these books to influence kids regarding sexuality and to challenge parents’ traditional views about sex.[2]
They said so to the teachers and administrators![3]
Even some of the teachers and administrators thought the LGBTQ+ subject matter wasn’t age-appropriate for kindergarteners.
Fact #2: The school board said parents would be notified and could opt their kids out.
To alleviate the concerns of teachers and administrators, the school board promised that:
- Parents would be notified whenever the sexual-oriented books would be used in school
- Parents would be able to opt their kids out of exposure to the books by having an alternative book used instead.
This accommodation was promised in 2022 when the controversial books were first used in Montgomery County.
Fact #3: The school board abruptly canceled the accommodation policy.
In March, 2023, the schoolboard made the LGBTQ+ instruction mandatory for all students.
The board told the teachers to stop notifying parents when the sexually-explicit books were used.
A group of parents, led by Tamer Mahmoud – a Muslim father – sued the school board for violating the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.
Mahmoud v. Taylor requested a preliminary injunction so that parents could opt their kids out while the legality of the school board policy was litigated.
The Department of Justice supported the case with written briefs.[4]
Fact #4: Both district and appeals courts denied the injunction request.
The First Amendment prohibits an “establishment of religion” by government, and says government may not prohibit “the free exercise” of religion.
The district and appeals courts – Judicial Activists – denied the requested injunction by saying that government only prohibits the free exercise of religion if it compels someone to abandon their religious beliefs.
This excludes “free exercise” from public places and restricts its meaning to apply only at home and in church.
This is hardly what the founders intended.
Fact #5: The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts’ decisions.
Justice Samuel Alito, writing the 6-3 majority opinion, explained that:
- The right to freely exercise religion includes the parental right to direct the religious instruction of their children.
- Schools imposing their own sexual ideology on children against the wishes of parents interferes with their right of religious instruction.
Alito wrote that “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.”[5]
Fact #6: The Supreme Court dissenters distorted the parents’ position.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor – joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson – twisted the position of the parents the same way the lower courts did.
Sotomayor claimed that the parents were demanding an opt-out “of every lesson plan or story time that might implicate a parent’s religious beliefs.”[6]
In contrast, Justice Alito pointed out that the LGBTQ+ storybooks were clearly intended to promote certain values and beliefs regarding sexuality and gender, and to discourage differing beliefs.
Fact #7: Christian parents who send their children to public school still have First Amendment rights regarding their children.
Many Christian parents have no choice but to send their children to a public school.
But that doesn’t mean they must surrender their constitutional right to freely exercise their religious beliefs in the public education of their kids.
The Constitution gives parents the right to direct the upbringing and education of their children.
It also gives them an additional, separate and specific right to the free exercise of their religion.
In Mahmoud v. Taylor, those rights intersected.
The Supreme Court strengthened both of them.[7]
What do you think? Email me at [email protected].
Action:
Support school choice. With school choice, the kids won’t be forced indoctrination against the parents’ wishes.
[1] Tiffany Justice, https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/04/22/maryland-parents-in-scotus-battle-for-their-kids/
[2] Thomas Jipping and Daniel Davidson, https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/06/27/supreme-court-ruling-means-parents-can-follow-their-faith-raising-children/
[3] Ibid.
[4] Thomas Jipping, https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/03/12/trump-administration-is-already-actively-defending-religious-freedom/
[5] Thomas Jipping and Daniel Davidson, op. cit.
[6] Thomas Jipping and Daniel Davidson, op. cit.
[7] Thomas Jipping and Daniel Davidson, op. cit.