Supreme Court is around MD. Parents who opposed LGBT books – NBC4 Washington

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the county of Montgomery, Maryland, parents who opposed religious reasons for the use of books with LGBTQ characters in primary school.

Parents who pursued argued that they wanted to be able to remove their children from the lessons using the books.

The judges ruled 6-3, the three liberal dissident judges. Judge Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion.

“Without injunction, parents will continue to undergo an unconstitutional burden for their religious exercise, and such a burden is undoubtedly irreparable injuries,” said opinion.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor wrote dissent.

“Throwing a long-standing precedent aside, the Court invents a constitutional right to avoid exposure to” subtle themes “contrary to religious principles” that parents wish to instill in their children, “she wrote.” Exposing students to the “message” according to which LGBTQ people exist and that their loved ones can celebrate their weddings and their life events, says the majority, is sufficient to trigger the most demanding form of judicial control.

The decision was not a final decision in the case, but the judges strongly suggested that the parents would finally win. The court judged that policies like that in question in the case are subject to the strictest level of examination, almost always condemning them.

At the White House, President Donald Trump described the victory decision for parents’ rights defenders.

“I think it’s a big decision for the parents. They lost control of schools. They lost control of their child. And it is a great victory for the parents,” he said.

The public schools of the county of Montgomery declared in a press release: “The decision of today is not the result that we hoped or worked. It marks an important challenge for public education nationwide. In the public schools of the county of Montgomery, we will determine the next steps and sail in this moment with integrity and objective – guided, as always, by our shared values ​​of learning, relationships, respect, excellence and participation. “

The Montgomery County Education Association published a first declaration expressing its disappointment in the decision.

“Although we are extremely disappointed with the decision of the Supreme Court, unfortunately, we are not surprised. MCEA considers that our public schools should remain inclusive places where the differences are celebrated. This decision brings us back and recalls an era when discrimination and intolerance were the norm,” said the organization.

The first member openly LGBTQ of the County Council of Montgomery, the member of the Council Evan Glass, described the decision as “painful reverse”.

“This decision sends a scary message, which threatens to retreat the progress that we have fought so much to make. But let me be clear: this fight is far from over. We will continue to defend, educate and celebrate the beautiful diversity of our community. They can try to silence our stories.

At one point, the school district allowed parents to withdraw their children from the lessons, but then reversed the course, saying that the deactivation policy was disruptive. Sex education is the only area of ​​teaching with a withdrawal provision in the schools of the county.

The school district presented stories in 2022, with titles such as “Prince and Knight” and “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding”.

The main complainants were Tamer Mahmoud and Enas Barakat, a Muslim couple who have a son in primary school. Other complainants were members of the Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox Churches. Parents, represented by the group of religious freedoms, Becket, said that, under the preceding of the Supreme Court, they have the right to withdraw from any instruction which would interfere with the religious development of their children.

The case was one of the many religious rights affairs at the Court of this mandate. The judges have repeatedly approved the allegations of religious discrimination in recent years. The decision during the month of pride comes in the middle of increases in recent years in the prohibited books of public schools and public libraries.

Parents of the county of Montgomery have demonstrated for and against LGBTQ lessons in schools

Hundreds of parents demonstrated outside a meeting of the County School Board of Montgomery in the summer of 2023 to say that they should be able to opt for their children of all lessons on gender and LGBTQ issues, arguing that the teachings go against their religious beliefs.

“Parental rights are important,” said some signs of the demonstration.

“We are religious; we have rights as Improves,” said Adon Gedie, the mother of a kindergarten. “Our children have the right to raise as a child. They are not big enough to accept everything. ”

The counter-demonstrators said that the lessons were not of a sexual nature and rather learned the importance of being inclusive.

“Books for young children only show a diverse fan of families,” said Christina Celenza, mother of a student from MCPS. “We have a cleaning of two mothers, so my wife and I are really proud and out, and, of course, my child in kindergarten or kindergarten will probably talk about his family and two moms.”

An MCPS literacy program has become a flash point among parents as they debate access to materials with LGBTQIA + themes in elementary schools. News4 Walter Morris reports.

Here is what the judges of the Supreme Court said during the arguments

During an oral argument living in April, judges seemed likely to reign for parents who opposed the books.

The members of the conservative majority 6-3, which often supports religious rights, seemed sympathetic during the oral two and a half hour argument.

Some judges have indicated that the refusal of the board of directors to provide an opt-out could have been motivated by hostility towards religion.

Conservative judge Neil Gorsuch was one of the many judges who raised comments by members of the school board who declared that the parents promoted “hatred” and perceived the same opinions as white supremacists.

“Does this suggest hostility to religion?” He asked, quoting a 2018 decision in which the court ruled for a Christian baker who refused to serve a gay couple on the grounds that a commission of civil rights of the state had shown an anti-religious animus.

Some parents say they should be able to opt for children in the LGBTQ program. Juliana Valencia de News4 spoke with demonstrators on both sides.

Other conservative judges have expressed the disbelief that the school board had too much trouble offering a deactivation.

“Why isn’t it possible?” said judge Samuel Alito.

“I do not understand why this is not possible,” added Brett Kavanaugh judge.

A federal judge and the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Richmond, Virginia, both ruled in favor of the school board.

The Supreme Court affair unusually struck near his home for some judges, because three judges live in the county, although they did not send their children to public schools.

News4 sends reports by e-mail. Go here to register for writing alerts in your reception box.