Liberal Supreme Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson failed to define what women could define at the confirmation hearing — appears to be lined up with Maryland school districts on Tuesday, seeking to force young children to participate in the LGBTQ+ curriculum despite opposition from parents.
In 2022, the Montgomery County Board of Education published a book on “Inclusivity” for K-5 students, robbing parents of notifications and opt-outs from storybooks discussing topics such as “gender” transition, pride parades, and favourable pronouns. In 2023, federal courts upheld a lower court ruling with Maryland’s largest school district, and a mix of Christian, Muslim and Jewish parents appealed to the Supreme Court. supreme court I agree We’ll be taking up the case in January.
To them petition, The parents ultimately told the Supreme Court, “Do public schools burden public schools with religious movements of their parents when they force public schools to participate in teaching about gender and sexuality against their religious beliefs?
Related: 26 states, lawmakers and faith groups support parents in Scotus Fighting Gradchool LGBTQQIAAP2S+ lessons
“Based on the records you provided, we know that at this point these books aren’t just sitting on the shelf,” Judge Jackson said of the reading material. Pride’s puppy, Uncle Bobby’s weddingand Born Preparation: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope.
This is an allegation already addressed early in Tuesday’s oral argument, and when conservative legal justice Clarence Thomas asked Eric Baxter, the Beckett Fund for religious freedom lawyers representing parents, the record said, “Does it show that children are more than simply exposed to things?”
“We know that teachers need to use the book. When the book was first introduced in August 2022, the board proposed to use it five times by the end of the year,” Baxter cited the transcript and evidence being submitted to the court. “Sherwood School, one of the schools in June, said it would read one book every day to celebrate Pride Month for Pride Month. The board’s own testimony said the book should be used as part of the direction and that the argument would continue.”
“That was the overall point of withdrawing the opt-out and even removing notification to parents. They are not even allowed to know,” Baxter explained. “The board said in its statement that it’s about ensuring that all students are taught through the inclusion storybook.”
Still, Jackson told Baxter, “You actually need to have a record of facts that is the basis for determining in your favor some acts that you complain about that you have to order.”
“And while in this situation, it’s actually difficult for me, we have a lot of sincere beliefs and concerns, children, principles, and I really want to be careful about seeing all of them and making declarations,” she said. It’s not just sitting on the shelf. ” [emphasis added].
Read more: Scotus appears to line up with Maryland parents over LGBTQ+ Books opt-out
Jackson repeatedly cut him off, but Baxter tried to straighten the record.
“I don’t agree, your honor,” he said. “The records are uncontroversial, and I’ll also introduce you to the District Court’s transcript again…”
Jackson suspended and Baxter asked if he thought the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals was wrong. “There is no information on how teachers or school employees actually used the book.”
“The Court of Appeals did not object to the need to use some books. We have everything…” Baxter began to respond.
Jackson again cut him off, saying the Court Circuit ruled “We don’t know what the children were taught along with their use.”
“So you say you have an affidavit and information about the classroom teachers? Jackson asked.
“Yes, that’s right,” he replied. “All of our clients are declaring what books are read by our children.”
Jackson cut Baxter off for the third time: “Did you have a client in the classroom?”
Baxter said his parents were not in the classroom, but “they don’t have to wait until they accidentally receive relief from their injuries.”
Later in the hearing, Jackson asked Baxter to explain that schools would force children to learn about certain topics.
“In such a situation, I think you’re struggling to see how parents burden religious movements when they teach that parents don’t agree. You have a choice. You don’t need to send your kids to that school. You can put them in a different situation.
Well, your honor, in this case, the world we live in means that most parents don’t have that option. They have two working parents. They can’t afford to send it to private schools,” Baxter replied.
“Yes, as a matter of practicality, absolutely,” Jackson said.
“And that’s the reality for our parents,” Baxter continued.
The case is Mahmoudv. TaylorUS Supreme Court 24-297.
Katherine Hamilton is a political reporter for Breitbart News. You can follow her on x @thekat_hamilton.
