Supreme Court Will Hear Case of Religious Parents vs. LGBTQ+ Books

The U.S Supreme Court has decided to hear a case in which parents are challenging their local schools’ inclusion of elementary school books containing LGBTQ+ material.

The plaintiffs in Mahmoud v. Taylor are a group of parents from diverse backgrounds— including Catholic parents Chris and Melissa Persak, and Jeff Roman — who are arguing that because Montgomery County, Maryland’s school leadership have not provided an opt-out option for parents regarding these books,  their first amendment rights are being violated, according to CBS News.

In the lower courts over the past three years, the county argued that though it is required to let parents to remove their children from  parts of sex education programs, the educators are not obligated to do so for the general curriculum, including language arts where the books are included. 

The books themselves — which include “My Rainbow“, “Pride Puppy!” and “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding” among others — were “merely added to the county’s list of reading materials to better represent the county’s entire population,” Maryland Matters reported, and were not “part of a coercive effort.” Although the books are not required reading, the county does require that  teachers make the books available in classrooms, and that they should recommend books on a case-by-case basis to students as options for group reading. 

Scotusblog.com said that Mahmoud v. Taylor will “likely be argued in the spring at the end of the court’s current term,” while CBS News said that it is “unclear” whether the case will be heard during this term or the next one starting in October. 

In lower-court documents the county said the books did not form “explicit instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation in elementary school, and that no student or adult is asked to change how they feel about these issues.” The plaintiffs in their petition wrote that the county’s denial of an opt-out option offers “no protection against forced participation in ideological instruction by government schools.”

So far, both a federal district judge and the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals have upheld the defendants, ruling that the plaintiffs have not met the burden of proof that their first amendment rights are violated by the lack of an opt-out option. The appeals court stated that though there is a possibility that the texts could be used to counter the parents’ religious instruction of their children, their mere availability and the parent’s inability to opt-out of the curriculum are not a constitutional infringement. 

The high court’s selection of Mahmoud v. Taylor follows on the heels of its Dec. 4, 2024 hearing of United States vs. Skrmetti, concerning a Tennessee ban on gender transition for minors, which the plaintiffs argue violates equal protection and parental rights.

According to Courthouse News Service, the Catholic plaintiffs believe their religious obligations about raising their children are in danger: 

“Chris and Melissa Persak, who are Roman Catholic, claimed that they had a religious obligation to teach their two elementary-age children about the biblical way to properly express romantic and sexual desires. Jeff and Svitlana Roman, who are Roman Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox, likewise said they had a religious obligation not to expose their child to instruction that could confuse his religious understanding of gender and sexuality. 

“The parents claimed that a ‘new government-imposed orthodoxy’ about gender and sexuality trampled on their right to direct the religious upbringing of their children.” 

Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, said he sympathized with the parents’ religious concerns, but that their claim of “government orthodoxy” is an overreaction. He stated:

“When parents choose public education, they are acknowledging that not all of their religious beliefs are going to be supported by a school’s curriculum. Pacifist parents and others with strong moral beliefs have always had to have conversations with their children when they came home with lessons of supposedly “great military victories.”  Parents do have a right to teach their children about their faith, and how their beliefs may not be totally congruent with information presented in schools.

“It’s particularly sad that this case includes Catholic parents, whose faith instructs them to respect LGBTQ+ people. Whatever they may think of sexual activity or gender identity, simple respect for others does not offend or do damage to their Catholic faith. LGBTQ+ people are a part of the social fabric these days. It’s sad to think that Catholic people still think they can be ignored as if they don’t exist.”

—Jeromiah Taylor (he/him), New Ways Ministry, February 13, 2025