{"id":351961,"date":"2025-07-01T10:00:11","date_gmt":"2025-07-01T04:30:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=351961"},"modified":"2025-07-01T09:54:21","modified_gmt":"2025-07-01T04:24:21","slug":"lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUS permits parents to opt-out their children from school lessons involving LGBTQ+ inclusive themes"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS):<\/span> While considering a matter concerning challenge to introduction of several \u201cLGBTQ+-inclusive\u201d texts into the public school curriculum by Montgomery County Board of Education (Board); the Full Bench of the Court comprising of John Roberts, CJ., and Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito*<\/span>, Sonia Sotomayor**<\/span>, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson, JJ., with a ratio of 6:3<\/span>, held that parents challenging the Board\u2019s introduction of the \u201cLGBTQ+-inclusive\u201d storybooks, along with its decision to withhold opt outs, are entitled to a preliminary injunction.<\/p>\n

The majority opined without an injunction, the parents will continue to suffer an unconstitutional burden on their religious exercise, and such a burden unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury; and an injunction would be both equitable and in the public interest.<\/p>\n

Background: Introduction of LGBTQ+ inclusive textbooks in public school curriculum:<\/h3>\n

During the Academic Year of 2022\u20142023, the Board introduced a variety of \u201cLGBTQ+-inclusive\u201d texts into the public school curriculum. Those texts included five \u201cLGBTQ+-inclusive\u201d storybooks approved for students in kindergarten through fifth grade, which have story lines focused on sexuality and gender.<\/p>\n

When parents in Montgomery County sought to have their children excused from instruction involving those books, the Board initially compromised with the parents by notifying them when the \u201cLGBTQ+ inclusive\u201d storybooks would be taught and permitting their children to be excused from the instruction. That compromise was consistent with the Board\u2019s Guidelines for Respecting Religious Diversity<\/span>, which professed a commitment to making \u201creasonable accommodations\u201d for the religious \u201cbeliefs and practices\u201d of students. Less than a year after the Board introduced the books, however, it rescinded the parental opt-out policy<\/span>. Among other things, the Board said that it \u201ccould not accommodate the growing number of opt out requests without causing significant disruptions to the classroom environment\u201d.<\/p>\n

The petitioners herein were a group of individual parents who came from diverse religious backgrounds and held sincere views on sexuality and gender, which they wish to pass on to their children. Faced with the Board\u2019s decision to rescind opt outs, petitioners filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Among other things, they asserted that the Board\u2019s no-opt-out policy infringed on parents\u2019 right to the free exercise of their religion. Petitioners sought a preliminary and permanent injunction \u201cprohibiting the School Board from forcing their children and other students\u2014<\/del>\u2014<\/ins>over the objection of their parents\u2014<\/del>\u2014<\/ins>to read, listen to, or discuss\u201d the LGBTQ+ inclusive storybooks. Furthermore, the parents sought a preliminary injunction that would permit them to have their children excused from instruction related to the storybooks while this lawsuit proceeds.<\/p>\n

Majority\u2019s Assessment:<\/h3>\n

Perusing the issue, the SCOTUS majority noted that to obtain the preliminary relief of excusing the children, the parents must show that they are likely to succeed on the merits; they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief; the balance of equities tips in their favour; and an injunction would be in the public interest.<\/p>\n

The majority opined that the parents had a greater likelihood to succeed on their claim that the Board\u2019s policies unconstitutionally burden their religious exercise. For many people of faith, there are few religious acts more important than the religious education of their children; and the practice of educating one\u2019s children in one\u2019s religious beliefs, like all religious acts and practices, receives a generous measure of constitutional protection.<\/p>\n

It was pointed out that the Board\u2019s introduction of the \u201cLGBTQ+-inclusive\u201d storybooks, combined with its decision to withhold notice to parents and to forbid opt outs, substantially interferes with the religious development of petitioners\u2019 children and imposes the kind of burden on religious exercise that has been found unacceptable in relevant SCOTUS precedents. The books were unmistakably normative and were designed to present certain values and beliefs as things to be celebrated, and certain contrary values and beliefs as things to be rejected. The majority elucidated their opinion highlighting the books concerning same-sex marriage. It was noted that many Americans advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. That group includes each of the parents in this case. \u201cThe storybooks, however, are designed to present the opposite viewpoint to young, impressionable children who are likely to accept without question any moral messages conveyed by their teacher\u2019s instruction. The storybooks present same-sex weddings as occasions for great celebration and suggest that the only rubric for determining whether a marriage is acceptable is whether the individuals concerned \u201clove each other.<\/span>\u201d<\/p>\n

The majority further pointed out that the storybooks similarly conveyed a normative message about sex and gender. \u201cMany Americans, like the parents in this case, believe that biological sex reflects divine creation, that sex and gender are inseparable, and that children should be encouraged to accept their sex and to live accordingly<\/span>\u201d. The storybooks, however, suggested that it is hurtful, and perhaps even hateful, to hold the view that gender is inextricably bound with biological sex.<\/p>\n

The majority thus found that these books imposed upon children a set of values and beliefs that are \u201chostile\u201d to their parents\u2019 religious beliefs<\/span>. Furthermore, the books exerted upon children a psychological \u201cpressure to conform\u201d to their specific viewpoints. The books therefore presented an \u201cobjective danger to the free exercise of religion\u201d.<\/p>\n

The majority of declined to accept the Board\u2019s contentions that the characterizations of the \u201cLGBTQ+-inclusive\u201d instruction was mere \u201cexposure to objectionable ideas\u201d or as lessons in \u201cmutual respect.\u201d \u201cThe storybooks unmistakably convey a particular viewpoint about same<\/span>–sex marriage and gender. And the Board has specifically encouraged teachers to reinforce this viewpoint and to reprimand any children who disagree<\/span>\u201d, which goes beyond mere \u201cexposure\u201d. Therefore, the majority concluded that the Board\u2019s policy burdened the parents\u2019 right to the free exercise of religion.<\/span><\/p>\n

Further considering whether that burden was constitutionally permitted, the Court pointed out that in most circumstances, the government is generally free to place incidental burdens on religious exercise so long as it does so pursuant to a neutral policy that is generally applicable. However, when a law imposes a burden of the same character as the challenged Board policy herein, strict scrutiny is appropriate regardless of whether the law is neutral or generally applicable.<\/p>\n

Thus, the majority opined that the parents were able to that they are entitled to a preliminary injunction. Specifically, until all appellate review in this case is completed, the Board should be ordered to notify the petitioners in advance whenever one of the books in question or any other similar book is to be used in any way and to allow them to have their children excused from that instruction.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dissenting Opinion:<\/h3>\n

Sonia Sotomayor, J., delivered the dissenting opinion in which Kagan and Jackson, JJ., joined. She opined that the majority ruling ushered in a new reality casting aside longstanding precedent, thereby inventing a constitutional right to avoid exposure to \u201csubtle\u201d themes \u201ccontrary to the religious principles\u201d that parents wish to instil in their children. \u201cExposing students to the \u201cmessage\u201d that LGBTQ people exist, and that their loved ones may celebrate their marriages and life events, the majority says, is enough to trigger the most demanding form of judicial scrutiny<\/span>\u201d. Sotomayor, J., pointed out that the majority\u2019s ruling, in effect, hands a subset of parents the right to veto curricular choices long left to locally elected school boards.<\/p>\n

The dissenting Judges observed that the Board found that LGBTQ children and families were underrepresented in its English language curriculum. To fill that gap, the Board worked with a committee of specialists to identify LGBTQ-inclusive books that it could incorporate into the existing curriculum, thereby creating the curriculum for 2022-2023.<\/p>\n

Pointing out that the majority misinterpreted the precedents, the dissenting Judges noted that the majority\u2019s myopic attempt to resolve a major constitutional question through close textual analysis of one of the LGBTQ+ inclusive story in question, reveals its failure to accept and account for a fundamental truth: LGBTQ people exist. They are part of virtually every community and workplace of any appreciable size. Eliminating books depicting LGBTQ individuals as happily accepted by their families will not eliminate student exposure to that concept. Nor does the Free Exercise Clause require the government to alter its programs to insulate students from that message.<\/p>\n

The dissenting Judges cautioned that the majority\u2019s decision will profoundly damage America\u2019s public education system. Requiring schools to provide advance notice and the opportunity to opt out of every book, presentation, or field trip where students might encounter materials that conflict with their parents\u2019 religious beliefs will impose impossible administrative burdens on schools. It was pointed out that under the majority\u2019s test, school administrators will have to become experts in a wide range of religious doctrines in order to predict, in advance, whether a parent may object to a particular text, lesson plan, or school activity as contrary to their religious beliefs. The scale of the problem is only compounded by the majority\u2019s conclusion that even \u201csubtle\u201d and implicit messages contained in children\u2019s books can trigger notice and opt-out obligations.<\/p>\n

Establishing a new constitutional right to opt out of any instruction that involves themes contrary to anyone\u2019s religious beliefs will create a nightmare for school administrators tasked with fielding, tracking, and operationalizing highly individualized and vaguely defined requests for particular students. In effect, then, the majority\u2019s new rule will hand a subset of parents a veto power over countless curricular and administrative decisions.<\/p>\n

The dissenting Judges stated that point of the Board\u2019s program was to ensure that diverse groups of students are represented in reading materials across the curriculum. \u201cThe Board cannot accomplish that purpose simply by consolidating all books involving LGBTQ characters into a single inclusivity hour and allowing opt outs, as the majority appears to believe<\/span>\u201d. The point of inclusivity is to use books representing a diversity of identities and viewpoints the same way one might use any other book, communicating that one\u2019s LGBTQ classmates should be treated in the same manner as anyone else.<\/p>\n

The dissenting Judges concluded cautioning that the Court’s ruling in effect, constitutionalizes a parental veto power over curricular choices long left to the democratic process and local administrators. \u201cThat 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\u2019s error will be felt, I fear, for generations<\/span>\u201d.<\/p>\n

[Mahmoud v. Taylor, No. 24\u2014297, decided on 27-6-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\n

*Majority judgment by Justice Samuel Alito<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

**Dissenting opinion by Justice Sonia Sotomayor<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Montgomery County Board of Education introduced a variety of LGBTQ+-inclusive texts into the curriculum which included 5 “LGBTQ+-inclusive” storybooks approved for students in kindergarten through fifth grade, which have story lines focused on sexuality and gender.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":351966,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[30686,84441,84443,33166,84442,30014,30019],"class_list":["post-351961","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-lgbtq","tag-lgbtq-inclusive-curriculum","tag-montgomery-county-board-of-education","tag-religious-belief","tag-school-lessons","tag-scotus","tag-us-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSCOTUS on LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Explore SCOTUS ruling permitting parents to opt-out their children from LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"SCOTUS permits parents to opt-out their children from school lessons involving LGBTQ+ inclusive themes\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Explore SCOTUS ruling permitting parents to opt-out their children from LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-07-01T04:30:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LGBTQ-inclusive-school-lessons.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"SCOTUS permits parents to opt-out their children from school lessons involving LGBTQ+ inclusive themes\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/\",\"name\":\"SCOTUS on LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LGBTQ-inclusive-school-lessons.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-01T04:30:11+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"description\":\"Explore SCOTUS ruling permitting parents to opt-out their children from LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LGBTQ-inclusive-school-lessons.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LGBTQ-inclusive-school-lessons.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"SCOTUS permits parents to opt-out their children from school lessons involving LGBTQ+ inclusive themes\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SCOTUS on LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons | SCC Times","description":"Explore SCOTUS ruling permitting parents to opt-out their children from LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"SCOTUS permits parents to opt-out their children from school lessons involving LGBTQ+ inclusive themes","og_description":"Explore SCOTUS ruling permitting parents to opt-out their children from LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-07-01T04:30:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LGBTQ-inclusive-school-lessons.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"SCOTUS permits parents to opt-out their children from school lessons involving LGBTQ+ inclusive themes","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/","name":"SCOTUS on LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LGBTQ-inclusive-school-lessons.webp","datePublished":"2025-07-01T04:30:11+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"description":"Explore SCOTUS ruling permitting parents to opt-out their children from LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LGBTQ-inclusive-school-lessons.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LGBTQ-inclusive-school-lessons.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"LGBTQ+ inclusive school lessons"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/01\/lgbtq-inclusive-school-lessons-parents-opt-out-scotus-legal-news-scc-times\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"SCOTUS permits parents to opt-out their children from school lessons involving LGBTQ+ inclusive themes"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LGBTQ-inclusive-school-lessons.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":300810,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/05\/mayland-school-no-opt-out-policy-lgbtq-books-discussion-religious-belief-us-district-court-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":351961,"position":0},"title":"US District Court rules Montgomery County Public Schools\u2019 \u201cNo-Opt Out\u201d policy for LGBTQ+ Inclusive Books does not violate children\u2019s religious beliefs","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 5, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court opined that the policy does not prevent parents or children from exercising their religious obligations. In fact, the policy serves the school\u2019s legitimate interest of fostering social integration and cultural inclusiveness of transgender and gender nonconforming students.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"no opt out policy discussion lgbtq+ books","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/no-opt-out-policy-discussion-lgbtq-books.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/no-opt-out-policy-discussion-lgbtq-books.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/no-opt-out-policy-discussion-lgbtq-books.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/no-opt-out-policy-discussion-lgbtq-books.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":296340,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/08\/american-constitutional-law-lgbtq-people-dissenting-opinion-wedding-website-designer-refusal-of-service-same-sex-couple-scotus\/","url_meta":{"origin":351961,"position":1},"title":"\u201cSad day for American constitutional law and LGBTQ+ people\u201d: Decoding the Dissent to SCOTUS allowing wedding website designer to decline services to same-sex couples","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 8, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"In a fierce dissent to the majority decision of allowing a wedding website designer to decline services to same-sex couples, 3 SCOTUS Judges pointed out that US Constitution contains no right to refuse service to a disfavoured group and cautioned that this decision may negatively impact not only the LGBTQ+\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"supreme court of the united states","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/supreme-court-of-the-united-states.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/supreme-court-of-the-united-states.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/supreme-court-of-the-united-states.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/supreme-court-of-the-united-states.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":286006,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/03\/supreme-court-kenya-upholds-lgbtq-fundamental-right-freedom-of-association-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":351961,"position":2},"title":"[LGBTQ+ Rights] | LGBTQ+ community have the Right to Freedom of Association, which includes the right to form an association of any kind: Supreme Court of Kenya","author":"Sucheta","date":"March 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"With a ratio of 3:2, the Supreme Court of Kenya delivered a significant decision by holding that it would be unconstitutional to limit the right to form association purely based on sexual orientation.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of Kenya","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-613.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-613.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-613.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-613.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":268427,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/15\/pride-month-how-law-schools-of-india-lead-the-pride-march\/","url_meta":{"origin":351961,"position":3},"title":"Pride Month | How Law Schools of India lead the Pride March","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 15, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cHope will never be silent.\u201d \u2014 Harvey Milk Amity Law School, Noida The law school has a legal aid cell which also works on LGBTQ+ issues. The work of the legal aid cell includes: webinars, seminars, conferences, guest talks, film studies, awareness drives, sensitization programs and legal aid drives. Two\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Law School News"","block_context":{"text":"Law School News","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/lawschoolnews\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-257.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-257.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-257.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-257.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-257.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":270937,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/01\/scotus-maine-department-of-educations-non-sectarian-requirement-for-tuition-assistance-payments-is-violative-of-us-constitutions-first-amendment\/","url_meta":{"origin":351961,"position":4},"title":"SCOTUS| Maine Department of Education\u2019s \u2018non-sectarian requirement\u2019 for tuition assistance payments, is violative of US Constitution\u2019s First Amendment","author":"Editor","date":"August 1, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court of The United States (SCOTUS): While deciding the instant petition wherein the Maine Department of Education (hereinafter the Department) was sued for instituting a requisite for schools to be \u201cnonsectarian\u201d in order to be eligible for tuition assistance; the SCOTUS, with a ratio of 6: 3 held that\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of The United States","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":300086,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/25\/supreme-federal-court-of-brazil-declares-homophobia-a-crime-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":351961,"position":5},"title":"Supreme Federal Court of Brazil in a historic 9:1 ruling, declares Homophobia a Crime","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 25, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"In a monumental decision, Brazil's Top Court declared homophobia to be a crime punishable by prison sentence.","rel":"","context":"In "Hot Off The Press"","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"homophobia is a crime supreme federal court brazil","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/homophobia-is-a-crime-supreme-federal-court-brazil.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/homophobia-is-a-crime-supreme-federal-court-brazil.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/homophobia-is-a-crime-supreme-federal-court-brazil.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/homophobia-is-a-crime-supreme-federal-court-brazil.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351961","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=351961"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351961\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/351966"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=351961"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=351961"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=351961"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}