Parental Rights Versus Inclusive Education Debate Heads To Supreme Court

Threestory yellow building with many windows

The Supreme Court will decide whether parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, can opt their children out of LGBTQ-inclusive instruction that conflicts with their religious beliefs, setting up a landmark battle over parental rights in public education.

Quick Takes

Over 300 religious parents are challenging Montgomery County’s policy requiring LGBTQ-inclusive books without opt-out options, claiming it violates their First Amendment rights.
Lower courts ruled in favor of the school district, setting up a Supreme Court showdown with oral arguments scheduled and a decision expected by June 2025.
The case (Mahmoud v. Taylor) centers on whether public schools can mandate participation in gender and sexuality instruction without parental notice or opt-out options.
The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission filed an amicus brief supporting parents’ rights to direct their children’s education based on religious beliefs.
A ruling could have far-reaching implications for over 1,000 school districts nationwide with policies regarding gender identity that limit parental involvement.

Religious Parents Challenge School District’s LGBTQ Curriculum

In 2022, the Montgomery County Board of Education implemented a policy requiring the use of storybooks promoting gender and sexuality inclusivity in classrooms. The policy initially allowed parents to opt their children out of this instruction, but the board later reversed this decision, eliminating the opt-out provision. This reversal prompted a coalition of over 300 religious parents to challenge the policy, arguing it violated their First Amendment rights by forcing their children to be exposed to teachings that contradicted their religious beliefs without providing any accommodation.

Abigail, stop lying to us!

You claim to “understand the challenges parents face” in Virginia’s public schools, but your record proves the opposite. You have consistently prioritized radical ideology over the well-being of students, ignored parents’ rights, and promoted policies…

— Elicia Brand #IStandWithIsrael. (@EliciaBrand) February 4, 2025

Lower courts ruled in favor of the school district, with judges concluding that parents do not have a constitutional right to opt their children out of objectionable public school curricula. The case has now reached the Supreme Court, which will hear oral arguments and decide whether schools can compel students to participate in instruction that conflicts with their families’ religious beliefs. The petitioners argue that the policy infringes on parental rights, religious liberty, and constitutes government-compelled speech in violation of the Free Exercise Clause.

Parental Rights vs. School Authority

The Supreme Court has historically recognized parents’ fundamental right to direct the upbringing and education of their children. The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) filed an amicus brief supporting the petitioners, emphasizing that the Constitution protects parents as the primary educators of their children. The brief argues that forcing children to participate in instruction that contradicts their family’s religious beliefs without any accommodation violates long-established constitutional protections.

The Montgomery County Board of Education and its supporters argue that the policy promotes diversity and inclusion, claiming that public education should be neutral and not subject to individual parental exemptions. They contend that allowing opt-outs would undermine the school’s mission to foster acceptance and understanding. The school district maintains that parental rights do not extend to vetoing portions of a public school curriculum, even when it conflicts with religious beliefs.

Broader Implications for Schools Nationwide

This case occurs against a backdrop of growing tension over parental involvement in gender-related policies. According to a Heritage Foundation report, over 1,000 school districts have implemented policies that exclude parents from knowing or participating in their children’s gender identity decisions at school. These policies typically treat a student’s communicated gender identity as conclusive, require school personnel to use preferred names and pronouns, and prohibit communication with parents without the student’s permission.

“Parents are the most natural protectors of their children. Yet many states and school districts have enacted policies that imply students need protection from their parents,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon.

The U.S. Department of Education recently issued guidance emphasizing that schools receiving federal funding must comply with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which gives parents the right to review all education records of their children, including documents related to gender identity. This directive aligns with the arguments of those supporting parental rights in the Montgomery County case, suggesting a potential shift in how schools must balance inclusive education with parental involvement.

What’s at Stake

A ruling in favor of the parents could establish stronger protections for parental rights and religious liberty in public education, setting a precedent for religious accommodations in schools across the country. It could require school districts to provide opt-out options for instruction that conflicts with families’ religious beliefs, and potentially impact policies regarding parental notification about gender identity issues. Conversely, a ruling for the school district could further limit parents’ ability to shield their children from curriculum they find objectionable on religious grounds.

The case has special significance for religious communities, including Southern Baptists, who passed a resolution at their 2024 convention affirming “that parents have the freedom to make decisions regarding the upbringing, education, and healthcare of their children without undue interference, recognizing that parents are the primary arbiters of a child’s moral and spiritual formation.” The Supreme Court’s decision, expected by June 2025, will likely reshape the balance between parental authority and public education objectives for years to come.

Sources: