HRC President: Supreme Court “Tells LGBTQ+ Students that they Don’t Belong,” Allows Parents to Opt-Out Students from Reading LGBTQ+ Themed Storybooks

by Aryn Fields •

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled educators and undermined inclusive curricula promoting understanding and respect for different groups of people in Mahmoud v. Taylor, a case concerning parents who claim their religious beliefs are infringed by age-appropriate curriculum and storybooks that feature LGBTQ+ characters and families. This decision elevates the religious beliefs of some parents, who believe that being LGBTQ+ is wrong, over any acknowledgement in the classroom that LGBTQ+ young people and their families exist. It overlooks public schools as places for students to learn diverse perspectives, opens the door for parents to opt-out children for any subject they find “objectionable” and sends a message to LGBTQ+ students and their families that their experiences and stories aren’t equally important. 

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson released the following statement:

“Every child deserves to see themselves reflected in the stories they read and to be celebrated in their classrooms for who they truly are. This ruling not only tells LGBTQ+ students that they don’t belong, but that their experiences and existence are less worthy of respect. In a country where LGBTQ+ youth already face disproportionate rates of bullying, homelessness, and mental health challenges, this ruling weaponizes religious freedom to further marginalize vulnerable students. It's wrong, it's dangerous and it’s cruel—plain and simple.

As the LGBTQ+ community continues to navigate targeted attacks on inclusive education, we must do everything we can to ensure classrooms are welcoming for all—providing every student with the support and resources they need to thrive.” 

In the Court’s dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor writes that this decision “guts our free exercise precedent and strikes at the core premise of public schools: that children may come together to learn not the teachings of a particular faith, but a range of concepts and views that reflect our entire society. Exposure to new ideas has always been a vital part of that project, until now. The reverberations of the Court’s error will be felt, I fear, for generations. Unable to condone that grave misjudgment, I dissent.”

The case originates out of Maryland, where parents from Montgomery County argued that their religious freedoms under the First Amendment were violated when they should have been able to opt-out their students from being presented storybooks with LGBTQ+ themes. The County argued that sharing ideas in a public school setting that are different from a student or parent’s religious beliefs does not violate the Constitution, and warned that requiring parental opt-outs for everything that is objectionable would have devastating consequences for the state of public education. Despite this, the Court has ruled to undercut the County’s local authority to create inclusive environments, opening the door for less understanding of LGBTQ+ youth and families. 

Contact Us

To make a general inquiry, please visit our contact page. Members of the media can reach our press office at: (202) 572-8968 or email press@hrc.org.