Below is my column in The Hill on the ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor in favor of parents who want to withdraw their children from LGBTQ lessons in public schools. I agreed with the majority, but it was Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent (joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson) that was the most striking in its apocalyptic take on allowing parents to remove their children from these classes. Despite the fact that various opt-outs have been allowed for parents, this one is deemed a threat to the very essence of public education.
Here is the column:
The end is nigh.
That seems to be the message this week from the three liberal justices at the Supreme Court when faced with the nightmarish prospect of parents being able to remove their young children from mandatory classes on gay, lesbian and transgender material.
The decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor was a roaring victory for parents in public schools. The Montgomery County, Md. school system fought to require the reading of 13 “LGBTQ+-inclusive” texts in the English and Language Arts curriculum for kids from pre-K through 12th grade. That covers children just 5-11 years old.
The children are required to read or listen to stories like “Prince & Knight” about two male knights who marry each other, and “Love Violet” about two young girls falling in love. Another, “Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope,” discusses a biological girl who begins a transition to being a boy.
Teachers were informed that this was mandatory reading, which must be assigned, and that families would not be allowed to opt out. The guidelines for teachers made clear that students had to be corrected if they expressed errant or opposing views of gender. If a child questions how someone born a boy could become a girl, teachers were encouraged to correct the child and declare, “That comment is hurtful!”
Even if a student merely asks, “What’s transgender?,” teachers are expected to say, “When we’re born, people make a guess about our gender and label us ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ based on our body parts. Sometimes they’re right and sometimes they’re wrong.”
Teachers were specifically told to “[d]isrupt” thinking or values opposing transgender views.
Many families sought to opt out of these lessons. The school allows for such opt-outs for a variety of reasons, but the Board ruled out withdrawals for these lessons. Ironically, it noted that so many families were upset and objecting that it would be burdensome to allow so many kids to withdraw.
The Montgomery County school system is one of the most diverse in the nation. And Christian, Muslim, and other families objected to the mandatory program as undermining their religious and moral values.
The majority on the Supreme Court ruled that, as with other opt-outs, Montgomery County must allow parents to withdraw their children from these lessons. The response from liberal groups was outrage. Liberal sites declared “another victory for right-wing culture warriors,” even though the public overwhelmingly supported these parents.
However, the most overwrought language came not from liberal advocates but liberal justices.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor declared that there “will be chaos for this nation’s public schools” and both education and children will “suffer” if parents are allowed to opt their children out of these lessons. She also worried about the “chilling effect” of the ruling, which would make schools more hesitant to offer such classes in the future. It was a particularly curious concern, since parents would like teachers to focus more on core subjects and show greater restraint in pursuing social agendas.
The majority pushed back against “the deliberately blinkered view” of the three liberal justices on dismissing the objections of so many families to these lessons. Nevertheless, even though such material was only recently added and made mandatory, the liberal justices declared that “the damage to America’s public education system will be profound” and “threatens the very essence of public education.”
The truth is that this decision could actually save public education in the U.S.
Previously, during oral argument, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson had shocked many when she dismissed the objections of parents, stating that they could simply remove their children from public schools. It was a callous response to many families who do not have the means to pay for private or parochial schools.
Yet, it is a view previously expressed by many Democratic politicians and school officials. State Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Wis.) once insisted: “If parents want to ‘have a say’ in their child’s education, they should homeschool or pay for private school tuition out of their family budget.”
Iowa school board member Rachel Wall said: “The purpose of a public ed is to not teach kids what the parents want. It is to teach them what society needs them to know. The client is not the parent, but the community.”
These parents still harbor the apparently misguided notion that these remain their children.
Today, many are indeed following Jackson’s advice and leaving public schools. The opposition of public-sector unions and many Democratic politicians to school vouchers is precisely because families are fleeing the failing public school systems. Once they are no longer captive to the system, they opt for private schools that offer a greater focus on basic educational subjects and less emphasis on social activism.
Our public schools are imploding. Some are lowering standards to achieve “equity” and graduating students without proficiency skills. Families are objecting to the priority given to political and social agendas to make their kids better people when they lack math, science, and other skills needed to compete in an increasingly competitive marketplace.
This decision may well save public schools from themselves by encouraging a return to core educational priorities.
It may offer some cover for more moderate school officials to push back against such demands for mandatory readings to young children.
What the majority calls “the deliberately blinkered view” of the dissent could just as well describe the delusional position of public school boards and unions. Schools are facing rising debt and severe declines in enrollment, yet unions in states like Illinois are demanding even more staff increases and larger expenditures.
The liberal justices are right about one thing: This is a fight over “the essence of public education.” However, it is the parents, not the educators (or these justices) who are trying to restore public education to meet the demands for a diverse nation.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the best-selling author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Private universities, including in the Ivy League, also openly lowered standards to achieve “equity”. “Educating” our children is in the hands of people who Justice Clarence Thomas recently referred to as the “expert class”. Harvard chose an atheist as head chaplain … the “expert class” isn’t fooling around.
The idea that young children need exposed to this stuff is almost too bizarre for words. They should be teaching Civics instead of this – learning about Washington, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and Lincoln. Pretty clear from all the things I see online that there are large swaths of people who lack rudimentary knowledge about such things. The Founders were aware of the need for an educated citizenry and the kids today are not getting it.
“Students of reading, writing and common arithmetick . . . Graecian [Greek], Roman, English and American history . . . should be rendered . . . worthy to receive, and able to guard the sacred deposit of the rights and liberties of their fellow citizens.” (Thomas Jefferson)
“Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom.” (John Adams).
“Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people.” (John Adams).
“A primary object should be the education of our youth in the science of government. In a republic, what species of knowledge can be equally important? And what duty more pressing than communicating it to those who are to be the future guardians of the liberties of the country?” (George Washington)
Here are the books that Montgomery Co felt appropriate for 5-11 year olds:
1. Uncle Bobby’s Wedding by Sarah S. Brannen (Kindergarten) – A story about a girl attending her uncle’s same-sex wedding, celebrating family and love.
2. Pride Puppy by Robin Stevenson (Pre-Kindergarten) – An alphabet primer about a family whose puppy gets lost at a Pride parade.
3. My Rainbow by DeShanna Neal and Trinity Neal (2nd Grade) – Based on a true story about a mother creating a rainbow-colored wig for her transgender daughter.
4. Prince & Knight by Daniel Haack (2nd Grade) – A story where a prince falls in love with a knight who helps him defeat a dragon.
5. Love, Violet by Charlotte Sullivan Wild (1st Grade) – A story about a girl’s anxiety over giving a valentine to another girl.
6. Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope by Jodie Patterson (Grade level not specified) – A story about a transgender boy sharing his gender identity with his family.
7. IntersectionAllies: We Make Room for All by Carolyn Choi and Chelsea Johnson (1st Grade) – A book promoting inclusivity and diversity, including LGBTQ+ themes.
8. What Are Your Words? by Katherine Locke (Grade level not specified) – A story discussing pronouns and gender identity.
Oh how did we survive the last 249 years without this Grooming?????????? These 3 Justices become more insane every term!
the end is near for liberalism and age will soon take care of two of the three liberal women justices that have no idea they are even women.
I’m amazed to see all the comments supporting the dissent!
The point being missed is reading, wrighting, and Arithmatic isn’t the focus, but crap that will never help the children learn how to think is!
It’s one person, probably a purple haired trans public school teacher, upset that he/she/it cannot recruit anymore.
In other words, astroturf, like so much of the left. Make believe. Not real.
Why do we have LGBTQ lessons in our schools in the first place?? And, if we must, parents should have to opt in, not opt out. Our schools are failing our students in teaching them the basics of reading and math, never mind civics. Spend more time on core subjects and get rid of LGBTQ lessons altogether.
Because if they don’t get to indoctrinate five year olds with trans ideology, it’s TrAnS gEnOcIdE!!!
Coincidentally to the headline, Sir Isaac Mewton believed that God’s kingdom and judgment day would be in the 21st century
https://isaac-newton.org/statement-on-the-date-2060/
“The clent is not the parent”? — Who the F do you think pays your salary?
I hope these school board pedophiles are brought to justice and are replaced with nationwide school choice.
Today’s children will be tomorrow’s employers, managers, leaders, police officers, military leaders and parents.
Do we really want to teach kids that only white men are superior to women, African-Americans or LGBTQ-Americans?
Bad education and lack of education has terrible consequences for society also.
“Do we really want to teach kids that only white men are superior to women, African-Americans or LGBTQ-Americans?”
Non sequitur. You’re not good at this.
Whether you like it or not, some humans are superior to others. You have the mindset of a socialist to set who thinks everyone is equal. We are not.
Socialism is a social experiment gone wrong; its a failure, contrary to human nature.
No one is teaching white men are superior to anyone. That is just a woke leftist fear mongering. What should be taught is real topics like reading, writing, math, history, civics, science. Not leftist indoctrination. Leftist indoctrination has no real value in the real world.
“Leftist indoctrination has no real value in the real world.”
It gets the left power, the only thing they crave. And with that power they destroy societies.
Do we really want to teach kids that only white men are superior to women, African-Americans or LGBTQ-Americans?
Old White Man Biden spent four years ordering women to submit to tranny men. Do you really think that Lyin’ Like A Biden is going to give you credibility and result in people believing the lie that is what is happening?
Excellent article! The adamant requirement to present age-inappropriate information to young children bespeaks a desperation to brainwash these children into an agenda that they know doesn’t fly with rational adults. Such brainwashing is not consistent with freedom of religion or the right of parents to determine moral parameters for their own children. To sacrifice math, science, history, and literature on the altar of a minority’s sexual predilections is to sacrifice the future of these children.
Women have only been able to vote since 1920. Could a parent opt-out their kids learning that women had equal rights to men? What a “woke” radical concept. Returning to a more conservative “Hand Maids Tale” America when women has very few rights.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on both of these “woke” issues, that both groups (women and LGBTQ Americans) had equal rights as white men.
Using this standard it would seem to open Pandora’s Box!
Non sequitur. Your hysterics are amusing.
We don’t teach kindergartners and 1st graders about equal rights. You also ignore religious freedom. No one in any way has restricted the right of women and LGBT Americans in this decision. What is taught and what is not taught in schools is variable from area to area, state to state and school board to school board. It is called curriculum and is different in many different place, that does not mean anyone is violating anyone’s rights. Your arguments are specious and best and outright lies at the worst. Public Schools should teach the basics like reading, writing, math and basic science.
To equate the right to vote for women (not exactly a minority group since they make up a majority of the population), an actual civics lesson, to sexual preferences (a human sexual function and not a civics lesson) of at most 5% of the population is really kind of stupid if you think about it.
Maybe if you were bright you would have tried, probably unsuccessfully, to equate the movement to legalize gay marriage with other civil rights movement. The ironic thing is that when people were worried that the gay activists were not going to be satisfied with achieving the right to marry and that they would just move on to the next “battle” they were right.
Most people could see and understand the argument for gay marriage, but the left, a never satisfied insatiable group of fascist activists, then moved on to having laws making it illegal for a teacher to let a parent know when their kid was being cajoled into having a different name and gender at school. They created class after class, or lesson after lesson, about kids not being born in their gender, having drag queens read to first grade children and involving kids as young as 7 in gender discussions.
They, the left, went nuts when the state of Florida made it illegal to teach radical gender and sexual preference to kids from K thru 3rd grad and they disingenuously called it the “Don’t Say Gay Bill”.
The left never stops. Ever! They went from fighting for the Dreamers to demanding the border be open for the entire world, and they made this move in only a few years.
The left NEVER stops.
HullBobby,
Well said.
The fact so many parents wanted to opt out of these so call lessons, tells us exactly how wrong the school board was. The fact they wanted to keep these lessons from the parents tells us they are not teaching anything but promoting indoctrination. We need to get this woke leftist agenda out of public schools. And if these fascist activists continue to try to ram this indoctrination down children’s throats, then we need to pass more parents rights, school choice laws and let parents vote with their wallets.
It’s hard to believe that morons like you are out there, yet here you are.
And they vote, too.
Autopens have consequences.
Good column. It is easy to suggest the heart of the issue is based on the question, “Who owns the children?”
Many on the left or far left argue the state ownership, and it appears three members of the US Supreme Court believe the same. To me, it seems the left has given up on enrolling adults into their social justice club, and now relies on capturing all the future adults, even into the early grades. We’ve seen this concept previously with the short lived regime of Thailand dictator Pol Pot, who from 1976-79 had the same ideas but more power to do it. It was a bridge too far. The American left has similar thoughts, perhaps without all the murder.
As I remember, Pol Pot wass in Cambodia.
So? Hitler was in Germany and your side calls all conservatives Hitler every day.
From Gary’s comment, I have no idea what side he is on. I think he was just correcting the previous commenter who incorrectly stated Pol Pot was Thailand’s dictator.
Every public school teacher and every public school board (constitutionally oath-sworn government employees) have a “duty” to teach the content of U.S. Supreme Court rulings governing LGBTQ rights.
A ruling on constitutionality by an ultra-conservative U.S. Supreme Court is not “woke” at all. It’s the duty of every public school teacher.
Would it be “woke” to teach kids about the U.S. Supreme Court case “Loving v. Virginia” – which legitimizes the marriages of Clarence Thomas and Mitch McConnell?
This ultra-conservative U.S. Supreme Court ruled that LGBTQ-Americans have equal marriage rights and equal adoption rights as anyone else does.
Public school teachers have a “duty” to teach kids that in America we don’t have 2nd Class citizens that are subordinate to 1st Class citizens!
Non sequitur. All of it. This is your third out of context screed on this. Go take a walk, get away from the computer. You’re having a hysterical breakdown.
“Every public school teacher and every public school board (constitutionally oath-sworn government employees) have a “duty” to teach the content of U.S. Supreme Court rulings governing LGBTQ rights.“
Why only LGBTQ rights? What about the rights of everyone who prevailed in every SC decision? Should every one of their rights be taught to 4th graders?
America, as well as all societies have classes of citizens. Then the rule should be is to maximize a child’s potential so that can be “equal” instead of beating them down with “equality” propaganda.
It is every parents rights to opt out of fascist leftists indoctrination. It is teachers duty to teach. NOT to indoctrinate woke leftist ideology.
a simple solution to this problem Offer School vouchers, vouchers, and vouchers, let them take those vouchers to any school.
The main supporters of this agenda in our public schools realize that vouchers to any school would annihilate their plans. The indoctrinated public school system can’t compete against a quality education policy that doesn’t include this LGBTQ tripe. Weingarten and company would lose their federal funds without students. Federal funds that they can use to further corrupt the students, the administrators, the DemonRat supporters. Equal vouchers for all students and qualified & quality schools for a quality education covering the three r’s first in lock step with STEM topics in order to keep our country and the world stronger, more equal, and truly fair for all.
I’m in a panic! I was born in the early 1950s and I don’t know any of the leaders that we’ve had since then who were educated in this manner. I’d say it must be too late now to rectify about 70 years of toxic education. May I rest in peace 🙏
The key problem here is funding public schools largely through unavoidable property taxes. You may opt out and send your children to a private school but then you’re paying twice. Instead we should do what some European countries do and issue parents education vouchers which can be used at any approved school, public or private.
A little competition would do wonders for our public school system.
Vouchers have been allowed in some states for a while?
Blackbeard,
Well said!
Aren’t school boards elected? Elections have consequences.
Consequences… like putting more crazies on the board. Don’t always get the intended result of an election.
That is true about all elections. And judicial appointments as well. The solution is to vet them much more carefully.
Bring on the clowns …
George is already here