A federal appeals court denied a group of Maryland parents’ request that Montgomery County Public Schools enable them to opt their children out of LGBTQ-inclusive teachings.
A divided three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court judgment denying a preliminary injunction because the parents had not yet proved how the country’s board of education book policy would violate their right to free expression of religion.
Related posts
Three sets of Muslim, Jewish, and Christian parents, along with a parental rights organization, sued the Maryland school system after it announced that parents would no longer be able to opt their children out of classes using a slate of newly approved LGBTQ-inclusive materials.
The parents claimed that the books “contradict their sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage, human sexuality, and gender” and that the absence of an opt-out clause violates their children’s First Amendment right to free expression of religion.
In his majority ruling, U.S. Circuit Judge G. Steven Agee stated that the record lacked sufficient evidence to determine the classroom use of the books and, consequently, the likelihood of the case succeeding.
Former President George W. Bush nominated Agee.
U.S. Circuit Judge DeAndrea Benjamin, a Biden appointee, joined him in the opinion.
U.S. Circuit Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum, Jr., a former President Trump appointee, dissented, stating that the board infringed on parents’ ability to influence their children’s religious education.
Eric Baxter, vice president and senior attorney at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents the parents, promised to challenge the verdict in an emailed statement to The Hill on Wednesday.
In his statement, Baxter stated that the court had just told thousands of Maryland parents they have no say in what their children learn in public schools. “That runs contrary to the First Amendment, Maryland law, the School Board’s own policies, and basic human decency.”
“Parents should be able to get notice and opt their children out of educational materials that violate their faith. “We will appeal this decision,” he added.
In August 2023, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman determined that the parents were unlikely to succeed on the merits and denied their request to keep the policy in place while the case was pending. She determined that they failed to demonstrate that the absence of an opt-out provision would result in “indoctrination of their children” or “coerce their children to violate or change their religious beliefs.”
“The parents still may instruct their children on their religious beliefs regarding sexuality, marriage, and gender, and each family may place contrary views in its religious context,” Boardman stated in the order from last year.
“No government action prevents the parents from freely discussing the topics raised in the storybooks with their children or teaching their children as they wish,” she stated.
