US Supreme Court to hear case on religious rights and LGBTQ books in schools

Conservative-majority court considers parents’ right to opt children out of LGBTQ-inclusive curriculum.

A supporter of the LGBTQ+ community stands outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on December 4, 2024. Photo by Roberto Schmidt/AFP

By Anna Fadiah and Hayu Andini

The US Supreme Court LGBTQ books case is drawing national attention this week as the high court, dominated by conservative justices, prepares to hear oral arguments in a case that could redefine the boundaries between religious freedom and public school curricula. The case centers on whether parents have the constitutional right to pull their children from classroom instruction involving LGBTQ-related books and discussions, based on their Christian or Muslim beliefs.

At the heart of the matter is a dispute between a group of parents and the Montgomery County public school system in Maryland. In 2022, the district began including age-appropriate books in the curriculum that addressed homosexuality, gender identity, and prejudice. These books, part of an effort to promote inclusion and diversity among students, were initially accompanied by a policy allowing parents to opt their children out of readings they found objectionable. But the policy was later rescinded, leading to the lawsuit now before the justices.

From curriculum inclusion to courtroom challenge

Parents from various faith backgrounds—including conservative Christians and Muslims—filed suit after the district revoked the opt-out option. They argue that the district’s decision amounts to a direct violation of their First Amendment rights, particularly the free exercise of religion. According to the complaint, the curriculum changes prevent parents from raising their children in accordance with their religious teachings, and instead, impose values that conflict with their deeply held beliefs.

"The Montgomery County school board wants to disrupt our rights as parents to pass our religious values onto our children," the plaintiffs allege. Their lawsuit has become a rallying cry for conservative activists who view the case as a bellwether for broader cultural conflicts in American education.

A shift in opt-out policy and its consequences

Initially, the district permitted parents to excuse their children from classes involving LGBTQ-themed books. However, district officials later concluded that the policy was logistically unsustainable. With so many parents choosing to withdraw their children from these lessons, some schools faced significant absentee rates that compromised the learning environment for all students.

“These opt-outs were unworkable,” the district argued. “Some schools, for example, experienced unsustainably high numbers of absent students.” Administrators maintained that the goal of the curriculum was not to indoctrinate but to foster empathy, combat bullying, and prepare students for a diverse society.

Nevertheless, the backlash was swift, particularly from religious groups who argue that such exposure represents more than mere inclusion—it is, they contend, an infringement on their ability to shield young children from values contrary to their faith.

Precedents and political context

The US Supreme Court LGBTQ books case does not exist in a vacuum. Across the country, debates over classroom content have intensified, particularly in Republican-led states. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed the controversial “Don’t Say Gay” law in 2022, which prohibits instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grade levels. Other conservative legislatures have pushed through measures that ban certain books, restrict access to LGBTQ-themed literature in school libraries, or require parental notification for lessons involving controversial topics.

Despite this political momentum, legal precedent complicates the plaintiffs’ claims. Historically, courts have ruled that exposure to contrary ideas in public school settings does not constitute religious coercion. In prior cases, the judiciary has maintained that public education is not obligated to mirror individual religious doctrines and that brief, indirect exposure to opposing viewpoints does not violate constitutional protections.

Trump-era Justice Department backs the parents

In a notable development, the U.S. Justice Department under former President Donald Trump has expressed support for the parents. Officials from that administration described the school district’s actions as “a textbook interference with the free exercise of religion.” Their amicus brief urges the court to recognize a clear boundary between public education mandates and parental religious autonomy.

While the current Justice Department under President Joe Biden has not weighed in, the case is likely to reverberate far beyond Maryland. If the court rules in favor of the parents, public schools nationwide may be required to reintroduce opt-out provisions or risk similar lawsuits.

The court’s composition and potential outcomes

The makeup of the court could prove decisive. The US Supreme Court LGBTQ books case will be heard by a bench comprising six conservative justices and three progressives. Recent rulings suggest that the majority is inclined to expand religious rights in public spaces. In decisions involving prayer at football games and funding for religious schools, the court has leaned toward broad interpretations of the Free Exercise Clause.

Legal scholars note, however, that the court may be cautious about setting a precedent that could unravel established curricular authority in public schools. If religious objections become grounds for widespread opt-outs, school districts could face challenges managing cohesive educational experiences for diverse student bodies.

The broader debate: inclusion vs. indoctrination

This case illustrates a growing tension between two visions for American education. One vision emphasizes inclusivity, diversity, and empathy for historically marginalized groups, including LGBTQ students. The other prioritizes parental rights and religious freedom, arguing that state institutions have no right to override family values.

For supporters of the Montgomery County curriculum, the books are part of an essential effort to reflect the real world and ensure that all students feel seen and safe. They argue that representation in education can prevent bullying, improve mental health outcomes, and foster respect for differences.

Opponents see it differently. They argue that inclusive curricula veer into the territory of social engineering, introducing young children to complex themes that should be addressed at home, in accordance with family beliefs.

A decision with national implications

As the court prepares to issue its decision—likely before the end of its current term in June—the stakes are high. The outcome of the US Supreme Court LGBTQ books case could redefine how far public schools can go in promoting inclusive values and how much control parents retain over their children’s exposure to controversial content.

For now, the debate continues, not just in the courtroom but in school board meetings, state legislatures, and dinner tables across the country. As the line between education and ideology blurs, the Supreme Court’s ruling may provide the clearest definition yet of where American society stands on these foundational issues.