Maryland parents raised a critical question: “Can I opt my elementary school child out of story hours featuring LGBTQ-themed books?” This issue was at the heart of the U.S. Supreme Court case Mahmoud v. Taylor, argued in April. The case centered on whether the Montgomery County Public Schools’ policy of denying opt-outs for such instruction violated parents’ First Amendment rights to freely exercise their religion. After months of deliberation, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision — and it’s in favor of the parents.

On Friday, June 27, the court ruled 6-3 in Mahmoud v. Taylor that parents have the right to opt their children out of story hours and lessons involving LGBTQ-themed books that conflict with their religious beliefs. The decision requires the Montgomery County school district to notify parents in advance when such materials are used and allow them to excuse their children from those lessons.

Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, stated, “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.” He added, “And a government cannot condition the benefit of free public education on parents’ acceptance of such instruction.”

The New York Post highlighted the contested materials, including “Pride Puppy,” a picture book for three- and four-year-olds that prompts children to identify items associated with a gay Pride parade, such as underwear, lip rings, drag kings, and the late gay liberation activist Marsha Johnson, whom critics noted was a former sex worker. Other titles promoted transgenderism, non-binary concepts, and questions like, “What pronouns fit you?”

Alito sharply criticized these materials, writing that “the storybooks unmistakably convey a particular viewpoint about same-sex marriage and gender. And the Board has specifically encouraged teachers to reinforce this viewpoint and to reprimand any children who disagree. That goes far beyond mere ‘exposure.’”

Experts and parental rights advocates are celebrating Friday’s ruling as a major victory for both parents and children. “This landmark decision underscores the essential role parents play in their children’s lives and education,” said Randall Wenger, chief counsel at Independence Law Center (ILC), in a press release shared with The Washington Stand. “As we highlighted in our brief, when school policies deeply conflict with families’ religious convictions, parents must retain the right to opt out.”

Additionally, ILC’s Legal Counsel Lauren Hackett stated, “We applaud this decisive affirmation of parental rights. As our brief argued, parents — not schools — should hold primary authority over sensitive curriculum decisions, especially those involving deeply held religious beliefs.” ILC’s Senior Counsel Jeremy Samek hailed it as “a critical victory for parental rights” that helps them “protect their children from gender identity indoctrination in schools.”

David Walls, executive director of The Family Foundation, also commended the ruling. The Foundation, in a brief shared with TWS, explained how they “joined an amicus brief from our ally at Maryland Family Policy Institute supporting a coalition of Christian, Muslim, and Jewish parents in their challenge to the school district’s policy.” And now, Walls emphasized, “We are grateful that the Supreme Court protected parental rights and religious freedom with today’s ruling. Schools should be focused on educating kids about the basics of math, reading, and writing, not seeking to indoctrinate them with radical gender ideology and LGBT propaganda.”

He continued, “Parents have the right to direct the upbringing of their children, and government schools have no right to infringe upon this right. The court correctly concluded that the Constitution does not allow government schools to circumvent the religious development of children against their parents’ will and behind their parents’ backs.”