Less than two weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case concerning a decision by Montgomery County Public Schools’ (MCPS) to not allow families to opt out of curricula with LGBTQ+ storybooks, state leaders and organizations from across the country are filing amicus briefs on either side of the issue.
On Wednesday, Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown (D) and 18 other Democratic state attorneys general filed an amicus brief in support of MCPS.
“All students deserve to learn in classrooms where they feel safe and respected, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity,” Brown said in a statement. “When public schools teach from LGBTQ+-inclusive books, they create a culture where all students can feel comfortable and accepted, fostering a learning environment that allows them to thrive.”
An amicus curiae brief is a legal filing submitted by a person or group intended to influence the court’s decision. The people or groups that write and submit an amicus brief are not directly involved in the legal case.
On April 22 the court will begin hearing the case brought by a group of parents who unsuccessfully sued MCPS for not having a policy to notify families when LGBTQ+ storybooks are used in the classroom and not allowing families to opt out.
The court said in January that it would hear the case, which The Washington Post first reported. The parents asked the Supreme Court to take on the case in September, after a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s denial of a preliminary injunction in May 2024.
Other organizations also have authored amicus briefs in support of the district, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Education Association (NEA), Maryland State Education Association (MSEA) and the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), alongside other education organizations.
Several amicus briefs have also been filed in opposition to MCPS, including one from 35 Maryland state delegates and senators and another from Republican attorneys general from 26 states, which were filed in March.
“As this outpouring of support makes clear, parents don’t take a backseat to anyone when it comes to raising their kids,” Eric Baxter, vice president and senior counsel at Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the firm representing the parents, said in a March press release. “Montgomery County’s decision to run roughshod over parental rights betrays our nation’s traditions and common sense. The Justices should restore the opt-out and allow parents to raise their children according to their beliefs.”
Amicus briefs in support of MCPS
The brief from the coalition of 19 state attorneys general, co-led by Brown and Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, argues that the district’s policies fall within state and local governments’ authority to shape public education and inclusive environments for students.
The brief notes a 2022 study found that 68% of LGBTQ+ students reported feeling unsafe at school due to their sexual orientation or gender identity and that nearly all of LGBTQ+ students reported hearing homophobic language by peers. The coalition argues that research shows students with access to curricula with LGBTQ+-related topics have experienced less discrimination.
The brief also argues that exposure to LGBTQ+-inclusive books doesn’t burden the right to free exercise of religion.
“Because such exposure does not force or compel the petitioners to abandon or act against their religious beliefs, the coalition argues that — consistent with Supreme Court precedent — Montgomery County’s policy is constitutional,” Wednesday’s statement from Brown said.
The amicus brief filed jointly by the NEA, MSEA, MCEA and other education organizations present a similar argument.
“With respect to the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, it is well established that mere exposure to ideas — even ones that offend an observer’s sincerely held religious convictions — is not a substantial burden on religious exercise that the Constitution will recognize,” the amicus brief argues.
Amicus briefs against MCPS
The amicus brief co-led by Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares and West Virginia Attorney General John McCuskey, who were joined by attorneys general from 24 other states, argues that parents have a right to guide their children’s education, religious upbringing and the right to opt-out from “exposing their young children to sex education that violates their religion.”
“Respondents ask this Court to sign off on a school policy that permits a local school district to impose its preferred ideology on young, impressionable minds — over their parents’ religious objections,” the amicus brief argues.
Thirty-five Republican Maryland legislators argue in their amicus brief that MCPS is subverting Maryland regulations that allow parents to opt out of sex education in public schools by including the LGBTQ+ books in its English language arts requirement.
“This exploit … transgresses decades of this Court’s First Amendment jurisprudence,” the lawmakers argue in their brief. “It was also never what the Maryland Legislature intended when it enacted the opt-out requirement, which by its terms, grants an opt-out right any time ‘instruction related to family life and human sexuality objectives’ arises.”
The legislators also argue that other members of the Maryland legislature are suggesting amendments to the regulations that would codify the MCPS decision to not allow opt-outs, which would “would represent an even greater affront to the First Amendment.”
