.png)
Justices Let Parents Opt Children Out of Classes With L.G.B.T.Q. Storybooks
- Adam Liptak, New York Times
- Jun 27
- 2 min read
Maryland parents have a religious right to withdraw their children from classes on days that stories with gay and transgender themes are discussed, the court ruled.
Parents with religious objections to storybooks with L.G.B.T.Q. themes may withdraw their children from public schools when the books are discussed, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday.
Ruling in a case brought by Maryland parents who objected to books with gay and transgender characters, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. closely analyzed the messages the books conveyed, reproducing color images from them in an appendix to his opinion, and noted that they were written for young readers.
But the logic of Justice Alito’s majority opinion in the 6-to-3 decision seemed to sweep quite broadly, allowing parents with religious objections to demand that their children not be instructed about gay and transgender themes but also about many other topics.
Indeed, some legal scholars said the ruling would have broad consequences for the ability of public schools to manage their curriculums. In earlier cases, parents unsuccessfully challenged storybooks about wizards and giants along with course materials on yoga, evolution and women working outside the home. Under Justice Alito’s reasoning, legal experts said, those lawsuits might now succeed.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor announced her dissent from the bench, a rare move and a sign of profound disagreement.
In her written dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, she wrote that public schools “offer to children of all faiths and backgrounds an education and an opportunity to practice living in our multicultural society.”
“That experience,” she added, “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.”
Justin Driver, a law professor at Yale, said the decision was deeply problematic.
“This decision succeeds in opening Pandora’s box in countless classrooms located in our nation’s public schools,” he said. “It unwisely grants parents and students the authority to, in effect, veto individual school lessons and assignments, thereby wreaking educational havoc.”
A lawyer for the parents, Eric Baxter of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, welcomed the decision.
“This is a historic victory for parental rights in Maryland and across America,” he said. “Kids shouldn’t be forced into conversations about drag queens, pride parades or gender transitions without their parents’ permission.”
The decision extended a winning streak for claims of religious freedom at the court, gains that have often come at the expense of other values, notably gay rights.
(c) 2025, The New York Times
Comments