This amicus brief argues that parents have a fundamental right to control their children’s education, including deciding what religious and moral teachings they receive. The case arose after a Maryland school board introduced LGBTQ-inclusive books into the curriculum without allowing parents to opt out. The brief claims that this policy violates parents’ religious freedoms by forcing their children to be exposed to lessons that conflict with their faith. It argues that parental rights are deeply rooted in U.S. history and legal precedent, and that schools should not override parents’ authority on sensitive issues like gender and sexuality.
The brief also asserts that the school board is effectively pushing a “religious orthodoxy” by promoting one viewpoint while disregarding others. It argues that denying opt-outs places an unfair burden on religious parents, forcing them to choose between violating their beliefs or pulling their children from public school—an option that may not be financially feasible. The brief claims this is a form of indirect coercion, as parents should not have to sacrifice their children’s education to maintain their religious values. Ultimately, it urges the Supreme Court to overturn the lower court ruling and protect parents’ rights to direct their children’s upbringing.
