US Supreme Court backs parents’ right to opt out of LGBTQ-themed school books

Read more at MSN.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled in favour of a group of parents seeking to exempt their children from public school instruction that conflicts with their religious beliefs, in a 6-3 decision that reinforces constitutional protections for religious freedom.

The case was brought by Christian, Muslim, and Jewish parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, who objected to the use of LGBTQ-themed storybooks in elementary school classrooms, particularly books addressing same-sex marriage and gender identity.

Justice Samuel Alito, delivering the majority opinion, wrote that refusing to permit parents to opt their children out of such instruction “poses a very real threat of undermining their religious beliefs and practices” and violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of the free exercise of religion.

“The Montgomery County Board of Education’s introduction of the ‘LGBTQ+-inclusive’ storybooks, along with its decision to withhold opt outs, places an unconstitutional burden on the parents’ rights to the free exercise of their religion,” Alito wrote.

The justices found that the parents were likely to succeed in their legal challenge and should be granted a preliminary injunction while the case continues, meaning the school board must temporarily accommodate their request to be notified in advance of any related instruction and allow their children to be excused.

“In her dissent, Sotomayor accused the court of inventing a ‘constitutional right to avoid exposure to subtle themes contrary to the religious principles that parents wish to instill in their children.’” She was joined in dissent by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

The dispute stems from a 2022 policy change when the school district introduced several LGBTQ-themed books into its language arts curriculum and initially allowed parents to opt out. A year later, the board reversed that decision, arguing the opt-out system was unmanageable and conflicted with the district’s commitment to inclusion.

The parents argued that mandatory exposure to the material, without an option to decline, amounted to “government-led indoctrination about sensitive matters of sexuality.” School officials, however, maintained that the books are intended to introduce children to “diverse viewpoints and ideas.”

During oral arguments in April, the court’s conservative majority signaled strong support for parental rights in such cases, indicating that allowing families to opt out of instruction on sensitive subjects should be “common sense.”

Only 0.03% Opt Out Of LGBTQ+ Education In Maryland After SCOTUS Gives Them A Right To

Read more at Erin in the Morning.

In June 2025, the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling allowing parents to opt out of classes that teach material conflicting with their religious beliefs. The decision, which could affect lessons on everything from evolution to cultural diversity, was driven primarily by challenges to classroom instruction about LGBTQ+ people. The case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, originated in Maryland’s Montgomery County School District—the state’s largest—which had previously required lessons on LGBTQ+ inclusion without permitting opt-outs. The ruling was celebrated by far-right activists as a major victory in a deep-blue state. But months later, the results are in: of more than 160,000 students enrolled, only 43 families chose to opt out of LGBTQ+ education districtwide.

In a report released on October 2, the Montgomery County School District approved just 58 opt-out requests from 43 families—under 0.03 percent of the district’s 160,000 students. In other words, 99.97 percent of families, even when given the option, chose to let their children learn about LGBTQ+ people.

The books targeted by the handful of families include Uncle Bobby’s Wedding, about the marriage of two gay men; Intersectional Allies: We Make Room for All, which features a genderfluid character; and Planting the Rainbow: Places of LGBTQ+ History in Maryland, which teaches about key moments in the state’s queer history.

For the families choosing to opt out, their children will be placed in separate classrooms or given alternate assignments when LGBTQ+ topics arise. The arrangement underscores a point the school district made during the court fight: creating entirely new materials for such a vanishingly small group is disruptive to classrooms and burdens teachers with unnecessary extra work—all to accommodate the religious beliefs of a tiny minority. Still, because of the Supreme Court’s ruling, those accommodations will now have to be made.

Meanwhile, in Republican-controlled states, officials have taken a far more oppressive approach to LGBTQ+ education. Rather than offering families the option to opt out, many states simply ban the material outright. Under “Don’t Say Gay or Trans” laws—first popularized in Florida and now enacted in 19 states—teachers are prohibited from acknowledging LGBTQ+ people in class instruction at various grade levels. In Texas, several colleges have gone even further, barring professors from recognizing that transgender people exist at all. When contrasted with the minuscule number of families opting out when given the choice, these policies look less like a reflection of public will and more like a top-down morality ban—one that would almost certainly be rejected if parents actually had the freedom to decide for themselves.

Anti-LGBTQ+ school policies remain among the most unpopular measures pushed by Republicans in red states and by the Trump administration. A Navigator Research poll published in August 2023 found that fewer than 25 percent of Democrats and independents—and only half of Republicans—named “protecting children from being exposed to woke ideologies about race and gender in school” as a major priority. Book bans ranked even lower: 92 percent of respondents said such bans were concerning. A more recent Knight Foundation poll echoed those findings, with two-thirds of Americans opposing efforts to restrict books in public schools.

Respondents from Montgomery County, Maryland expressed frustration and vindication after hearing the results of the opt-out process. “Every single one of these ‘anti-woke’ lawsuits and headlines comes from one or a few people making a stink,” said one commenter in a local subreddit dedicated to the county. “Imagine living in Montgomery County and thinking you can opt out of cultural diversity,” said another.

“It looks like most were from elementary schools, but there’s a few from middle schools and two from a high school. Can you imagine what these students’ classmates will think of them?” added a third.

The Supreme Court’s decision is just the latest example of how religious exemptions are being weaponized to roll back civil rights under the guise of “freedom.” Each new ruling gives a single person the power to disrupt an entire classroom, claiming that their beliefs are incompatible with learning about LGBTQ+ people, racial diversity, or any worldview outside their own. These carve-outs have already spread far beyond schools—empowering business owners to deny service to queer customers and pharmacists to refuse medication. But the data out of Montgomery County, Maryland makes one thing unmistakably clear: this crusade is not a mass movement. It’s the obsession of a vanishingly small minority, inflated by a Republican Party that has turned resentment of diversity—and especially of LGBTQ+ people—into the centerpiece of its politics.

Maryland becomes 5th state to decriminalize HIV

*This is reported by LGBTQ Nation

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore (D) signed legislation on Tuesday that decriminalizes HIV. The Carlton R. Smith Act – named for a local HIV activist who died last year – eliminates criminal penalties based on one’s HIV status. Maryland is the 5th state to decriminalize HIV, with North Dakota making the move just last month.

Until now, it was a misdemeanor in Maryland to “knowingly transfer or attempt to transfer” HIV to someone else. The law did not require intent to transmit, actual transmission, or conduct that would transmit the virus. Penalties included up to three years incarceration and a fine of up to $2,500.

Laws like this can deter people from being tested and treated for HIV. In addition, Maryland’s law has been disproportionately used to target Black people.

The Williams Institute found that from 2000 to 2020, Black people accounted for 82% of HIV-related criminal cases in the state, despite only making up 30% of the population and 71% of the people living with HIV. The study also found that Black men make up 68% of people accused in HIV-related criminal cases, despite being 14% of the state’s population and 44% of the population living with HIV.

When the study was released, Williams Institute HIV Criminalization Project Director Nathan Cisneros explained that the law was put in place “at the height of the AIDS crisis before we had effective treatments for HIV.”

“We now have medical treatments that wholly eliminate the risk of transmitting HIV through sex,” Cisneros explained, “yet these advances are not reflected in Maryland law despite several reform attempts in recent years.”

In a statement, Phillip Westry, director of the state LGBTQ+ organization FreeState Justice, celebrated the passage of the Carlton R. Smith Act, calling it “a testament to the power of education, research, and courageous leadership.”

“It sends a clear message,” Westry continued, “Maryland is committed to evidence-based policymaking and to ending the criminalization of people living with HIV. We honor the memory of Carlton R. Smith by continuing the work of building a more just, inclusive, and informed society.”

The 10 Best—and Cheapest—Cities for LGBTQ Homebuyers, 2022 – REALTOR.com

This blog originally appeared at Realtor.com

Pride Month means it’s time to celebrate all things that encourage the dignity, equality, and increased recognition of the LGBTQ community. So go ahead and wave that big, beautiful rainbow flag—and, just maybe, zero in on a place to buy a great new home.

It’s also the perfect time to pause and recognize that while the United States has come a long way from the 1969 Stonewall riots, which sparked the modern gay rights movement, 2022 is on track to break the record for the number of anti-LGBTQ bills introduced in states across the country, with at least 320 highly restrictive bills pending in state legislatures, according to the rights group Freedom for All Americans.

So, as we do each year, Realtor.com® searched for the most LGBTQ-friendly and affordable cities for homebuyers. We looked well past the big coastal cities famous for their thriving gay scenes—and wildly exorbitant home prices—like New York and San Francisco. Instead, we set our sights on smaller cities that are gay-friendly and budget-friendly, where housing is still modestly priced and the overall community and laws are more welcoming and favorable to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer individuals. All of these places have tons of fun things to do—and prices that are still (relatively) within reach.

Read Full Article – https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/the-most-affordable-lgbtq-friendly-places-to-live/


If you’re ready to look for a better state or county for you and your family (or family of choice), reach out to us at www.FleeRedStates.com

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑