Victory in Mahmoud as Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Religious Liberty

Today marks a landmark victory for parental rights and religious liberty. In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the parents in Mahmoud v. Taylor, reaffirming that the First Amendment does not end at the schoolhouse gate for America’s families. The Court held that when public schools compel young children to engage with instruction that violates their family’s religious convictions – without notice or the ability to opt out – the state crosses a constitutional line.

Protect The 1st is proud to have played a role in this moment. Our amicus brief made the case that public education must not come at the cost of coercing children to internalize state-approved moral orthodoxy on deeply contested issues like gender and sexuality. Today, the Court agreed, finding that the refusal of the school district of Maryland’s Montgomery County to send notices and allow parents to opt out of LGBTQ+-inclusive storybooks imposed an unconstitutional burden on religious exercise.

Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion rightly emphasized the gravity of this burden. By eliminating opt-outs and withholding notice, the school district forced religious families – Muslim, Catholic, Orthodox Jewish, Protestant, and others – to watch helplessly as their children were made a captive audience to instruction that directly contradicted their faith. The Court stated plainly that such state action “substantially interferes with the religious development of their children” and represents “the kind of burden on religious exercise” the First Amendment prohibits.

The dissent, led by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, warned of chaos in public schools. But that alarm misses the mark. What the majority affirmed is not anarchy, but pluralism. It is the idea that the state must respect, not override, the diverse moral frameworks that parents bring to the table. Requiring notice and limited opt-outs is not unmanageable; it is the minimum owed to families navigating a public school system that serves all.

As we wrote in our brief: “Such manipulation of a captive and vulnerable audience, imposed by what amounts to an unconstitutional condition on a public benefit, is both wrong and unconstitutional.” For families with deep convictions, this isn’t about shielding children from opposing views – it is about preserving parents’ right to shape their children’s moral and spiritual education in accordance with their values.

This decision is especially meaningful because it protects not just one faith or political ideology – it protects all. Today’s ruling restores a constitutional buffer between state instruction and family autonomy.

This Supreme Court ruling also corrects the dangerous precedent set by the Fourth Circuit, which had refused even to acknowledge that a burden on religious freedom existed. The Court’s decision now provides clarity: Parents’ First Amendment rights are not forfeited when they send their children to public school. Indeed, it is precisely in such common institutions that constitutional protections must be most rigorously observed.
​
At Protect The 1st, we have long argued that educational pluralism and the First Amendment are mutually reinforcing. Parents must be able to trust that their deeply held convictions will not be undermined without recourse.
 
“We applaud the Supreme Court for recognizing once again parents’ right to direct the education of their children, and the inappropriateness of schools foisting moral instructions upon captive children over the objections of their parents,” said Erik Jaffe, policy director of Protect The 1st. “This decision reinforces that when public schools step beyond the basics of education and into fraught social areas, parents and children have the right to opt out.”

DONATE & HELP US PROTECT YOUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS