麻豆精品

Two months after the U.S. Supreme Court granted public school parents the right to withdraw their children from materials and discussions on LGBTQ+ issues and other subjects that conflict with their 鈥渟incerely held religious beliefs,鈥� conservative leaders in California are predicting schools will be swamped with opt-out demands. 

That hasn鈥檛 happened yet, but attorneys agree that this latest escalation of the culture wars will likely cause turmoil, confusion, and years of litigation, largely because the court offered no guidance on how opt-out requests should be handled, how religious belief claims can or should be verified, and how schools should handle potential logistical issues.

鈥淭here is a lot of trepidation about how to handle this issue in a way that is legally compliant and doesn鈥檛 trigger a backlash from one side of the issue or the other,鈥� Troy Flint, a spokesperson for the California School Boards Association, told EdSource via email Saturday night.

鈥淪uperintendents have concerns about how to make a fact-specific determination regarding parent requests, and we have heard of districts getting threats of litigation from both sides,鈥� he said.

LGBTQ+ advocates and defenders of the state鈥檚 progressive school standards are threatening discrimination lawsuits if opt-outs are granted, Flint said. Parents are threatening to sue if they aren鈥檛 granted immediately.

In most districts, he added, leaders 鈥渁re hesitant to address this publicly for fear of attracting more scrutiny and making the issue even more difficult to manage.鈥�

A leading academic on education law said that while the Supreme Court decision was based on parental objections to LGBTQ+ books and lessons, the religious opt-outs are likely to have a broader reach.

鈥淚t is deeply misguided for people to believe that this case is only about LGBTQ+ and equality,鈥� Yale Law School professor Justin Driver told EdSource. The decision 鈥渟weeps, given the prevalence of deeply felt religious objections, to lots of material,鈥� he said.

It could 鈥渁ffect everything from reading to science, to literature to history. It鈥檚 difficult to overstate the significance of the decision,鈥� Driver said. 鈥淪ome people think Bert and Ernie are gay. Is 鈥楽esame Street鈥� now suspect?鈥�

California, for instance, requires students to learn the history of gay people fighting for civil rights and the story of the country鈥檚 first openly gay elected official, Harvey Milk. The San Francisco supervisor was assassinated in 1978 and posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by former President Barack Obama.

Flint said that parents 鈥渋n at least one district have hinted at trying to expand the opt-out requests to other types of instructional materials.鈥� He did not identify those materials.

Meanwhile, as school administrators ponder their next steps, firebrand social conservatives are seizing the moment that the nation鈥檚 highest court created.

鈥淭here should be opt-outs. There are things that go against what God laid down,鈥� pastor Angelo Frazier, of Bakersfield鈥檚 RiverLakes Community Church, said of what鈥檚 taught in California schools. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 not education. It鈥檚 鈥榊ou can touch me here.鈥� It鈥檚 very suggestive and inappropriate.鈥� He said the ruling was a relief to frustrated parents in his congregation. 鈥淚t gives them breathing room.鈥�

The leader of a Fresno-based Christian group, long involved in parental rights advocacy, said the state is no longer in charge of what children learn in school.

The ruling shows that 鈥減arents are the ultimate determination of whose values get taught to the child,鈥� said Greg Burt of the California Family Council. 鈥淲e鈥檙e now in charge of deciding what we think is good and what we think is not good.鈥�

But as opt-outs begin to play out across California鈥檚 more than 10,000 public schools as the 2025-26 academic year opens, the only certainty from the case,  is that uncertainties abound 鈥� and may for years.

They include:

• Can or should parents file blanket opt-out requests stating they want their child removed from any and all instruction about LGBTQ+ topics, and leave school personnel to sort it out? Or should schools ask parents to review reading lists 鈥� often available online 鈥� and let parents flag those items to which they object?聽
• What do school leaders do with students whose parents opt them out of a class? Their class time still needs to be used for instruction. Where do they go?
• Who watches or instructs the youngest of removed students, who can鈥檛 be left unsupervised? Some of the books cited in the Supreme Court case, including ones about a child鈥檚 favorite uncle marrying a man and a puppy getting lost at a Pride parade, are used in kindergarten and even transitional kindergarten classes.
• Will school districts need to budget money to defend lawsuits from parents whose opt-out requests may be denied?聽
• Can parents even attempt to opt out their child from exposure to an LGBTQ+ teacher, or a teacher who displays a Pride flag in a classroom?

Lawyers and academics interviewed for this story said that Justice Samuel Alito鈥檚 decision, joined by the court鈥檚 five other conservatives, offered little guidance on how opt-outs should work.  

Mahmoud v. Taylor happened because the Montgomery County schools in suburban Maryland created an opt-out program to appease parents who objected to the teaching of LGBTQ+ materials on religious grounds. But the program ended in less than a year. Alito noted in his decision that school officials found that 鈥渋ndividual principals and teachers could not accommodate the growing number of opt-out requests without causing significant disruptions to the classroom environment.鈥� Parents then sued.

Focusing largely on principles of religious freedom, Alito鈥檚 decision doesn鈥檛 specifically address how opt-outs might work given the Maryland situation, or how claims of a sincerely held religious belief might be evaluated. 

The high court has long recognized the rights of parents to 鈥渄irect the religious upbringing of their children,鈥� he wrote, a principle at the case鈥檚 core.

But in a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonja Sotomayor predicted opt-outs would cause 鈥渃haos for this nation鈥檚 public schools.鈥�

Giving parents the chance to opt out of all lessons and story times that conflict with their beliefs 鈥渨ill impose impossible administrative burdens,鈥� Sotomayor wrote. It threatens the very essence of public education.

&苍产蝉辫;鈥淭he reverberations of the court鈥檚 error will be felt, I fear, for generations.鈥�

Opting out in California

Conservative groups in California opposed to LGBTQ+ themed teaching materials are generating letters and emails to school districts for parents to use to demand that school leaders proactively remove children from classes where there might be any mention of gay or transgender people, same-sex marriage and other related topics.

A nonprofit Riverside County law firm, Advocates for Faith & Freedom, created calling for children to be removed from any teaching involving 鈥済ender identity, the use of pronouns inconsistent with biological sex, sexual activity or intercourse of any kind, sexual orientation, or any LGBTQ+ topics鈥� so parents can raise children 鈥渋n the fear and knowledge of the Lord.鈥�

The letter gives principals 10 calendar days to respond in writing. Lack of a response 鈥渨ill be considered a denial鈥� that will cause parents to 鈥減roceed accordingly.鈥�  

Erin Mersino, an attorney at the firm, said via email, 鈥渞esponses were just starting to come in,鈥� and that it was too soon to discuss the letter鈥檚 effectiveness. Other groups are circulating at least four similar opt-out templates or email forms.  

The 10-day response demand in the nonprofit鈥檚 letter 鈥渋s insufficient in my opinion,鈥� said Mark Bresee, a La Jolla attorney specializing in education law.

Bresee also questioned if 鈥渁 blanket, year-long 鈥榦pt-out鈥� demand鈥� is consistent with Alito鈥檚 decision, noting that the justice wrote that the 鈥渞eligious development of a child will always be fact-intensive. It will depend on the specific religious beliefs and practices asserted, as well as the specific nature of the educational requirement or curricular feature at issue.鈥�

It鈥檚 unclear how far and fast those letters are circulating. Some school officials said they have received a few opt-out notices.

Conservative activist Brenda Lebsack, a Santa Ana Unified School District board member, said mass opt-out requests are unlikely to come until school districts themselves notify parents of the new right the court granted. 鈥淥pt-out forms should really be coming from the schools because if you鈥檙e getting opt-out forms from all these different law firms, and they鈥檙e all different, that could get really confusing,鈥� she said. 

At the Manteca Unified School District in San Joaquin County, Assistant Superintendent Victoria Brunn said late last week that only one 鈥渙pt-out request has been received so far. She said the parents who made it were told it would be granted. 

A spokesperson for the Turlock Unified School District in Stanislaus County said it had received a single inquiry about the opt-out process and created a standard form for requests, but that no requests had been received. Parents can either use the form or email a teacher, citing&苍产蝉辫;鈥�specific instructional content鈥� a student should not receive, according to a copy provided to EdSource.

鈥淭eachers can also provide notice of upcoming curriculum,鈥� the spokesperson wrote in an email.

At the Hope Elementary School District in Santa Barbara County, Superintendent Anne Hubbard created an opt-out form. As of Friday, it had been used once to opt out two children in the same family, she said. 

Last week, the board of the 85-student Howell Mountain Elementary School District in Napa County canceled plans to create an opt-out form after community objections.

鈥淗owell Mountain Elementary respects and values the LGBTQ+ community. We will not be adopting any type of opt-out form that specifically targets LGBTQ+ curriculum,鈥� Superintendent Joshua Munoz said in a statement. Instead, the district will remind parents annually that the right to opt out exists, but will not cite any specific curriculum.

 that among those who spoke to the board was a St. Helena High School junior who鈥檇 attended Howell Mountain.

鈥淲hen I was in seventh grade, I realized that I liked girls,鈥� she said. 鈥淚n school, the times that we were taught about LGBTQ+ people would remind me that I was not alone. I was not a freak or an alien. I was just me. And I could still do anything I wanted in my life.鈥�

In San Francisco, Mawan Omar, the parent of a sixth grader, told EdSource he intends to opt his son out of LGBTQ+ materials because the teaching contradicts his family鈥檚 Muslim faith.  

Omar said his son, Hezma, objected on his own to an LGBTQ+ lesson in elementary school because it was contrary to what he had learned from the Holy Quran. 鈥淗e just didn鈥檛 want to be around it because he knows our religion,鈥� Omar said. After what he described as a dispute with the school鈥檚 principal, it was agreed informally that Hezma would be allowed to leave any classes involving similar materials.聽聽

Now, Alito鈥檚 decision, Omar said, is gratifying. 鈥淲e knew all along we were right.鈥�

But Lebsack, who focuses on transgender issues and has formed an interfaith coalition primarily around them, said Alito鈥檚 decision isn鈥檛 enough.

鈥淚 think Mahmoud versus Taylor is throwing us crumbs,鈥� she said in an interview. 鈥淚 mean, I鈥檓 grateful for it, but it needs to go much further than that.鈥�

Lebsack, a special education teacher and former Orange County probation officer, claimed the California Department of Education is ripe to be sued under the First and 14th amendments for 鈥渃ompelling public school students to accept and affirm extremist ideologies of unlimited gender identities鈥� and for 鈥渂ringing extremist forced teachings into K-12 public education.鈥�

Asked to respond to Lebsack鈥檚 assertion, a spokesperson for the state Education Department directed a reporter to guidance posted online about Alito鈥檚 decision. It states, in part, 鈥淭he California Department of Education and California law continue to promote a safe, fair, and welcoming learning environment in all schools. It is important to note that Mahmoud does not invalidate or preempt California鈥檚 strong protections for LGBTQ+ youth from discrimination, harassment, and bullying.鈥� 

The goal: Banning books?

Other conservatives said they see a path where Alito鈥檚 decision could lead to the removal of books and teaching they oppose by overwhelming schools with opt-outs to the point where the best option is to remove the materials.

鈥淚f there are so many people who want to opt out of this curriculum, maybe we should stop teaching it,鈥� said Julie Hamill, an attorney and president of the California Justice Center. School leaders, she said, should be reflecting on whether they are 鈥渄oing something wrong as a district and educational entity. Those are questions that are not being asked right now. It鈥檚 very obvious that鈥檚 what needs to happen.鈥�

Sonja Shaw, a Chino Valley Unified School District board member running for state superintendent of public instruction in next year鈥檚 election, said she wants opt-outs to 鈥渙vertax the system to where they just give up, and they stop teaching this stuff.鈥�

If so many opt-outs were filed that books are removed from curricula, that would help, said Burt of the California Family Council, which has urged parents to flood districts with opt-outs. 鈥淲e鈥檙e advocating for good books in school, and we think these are bad books, so we鈥檙e not going to be sad if we see them go.鈥�

But an anti-censorship advocate said that would amount to book banning by a different name. 

鈥淚鈥檓 not at all surprised that this is their plan of attack,鈥� Tasslyn Magnusson, senior adviser to the Freedom to Read team at PEN America, an anti-censorship group, said of conservative activists. 鈥淭hese are books about families. These are books about how we experience the world, and they鈥檙e beautiful and well written,鈥� she said. 鈥淩emember that it鈥檚 important for kids to have a variety of materials in front of them that resonate with their lives and their experiences.鈥�

Another impact of the opt-outs will be how LGBTQ+ students and students from families with LGBTQ+ members will react when classmates leave and when teaching materials reflecting their lives are presented.

That could make 鈥渁 child feel they鈥檙e not only different, but that they鈥檙e not accepted or that they should be ashamed of the family that they have,鈥� said Jorge Reyes Salinas,  a spokesperson for Equality California, a civil rights group. Although the opt-outs promise to be disruptive, he said, they won鈥檛 end the state鈥檚 use of an inclusive curriculum. 鈥淲e鈥檙e talking about a very small population of parents that are ignorant and full of hate.鈥�

The presidents of California鈥檚 two largest teachers unions both said educators are not going to fold under pressure created by the high court鈥檚 decision.

鈥淭he role of the public school is to help students develop the critical thinking skills and knowledge necessary to engage in a pluralistic democracy,鈥� said Jeff Freitas, president of the California Federation of Teachers. 鈥淲e cannot have individuals dictating what is the good of the public. It鈥檚 also important that our public schools avoid over-compliance and refuse to capitulate to the weaponization of this decision.鈥�

David Goldberg, president of the California Teachers Association, said that teachers 鈥渨ill obviously follow the law, but we want to make it clear to our members that there are other laws in California around kids鈥� ability to learn about their own identity, cultures, or all kinds of identities. We鈥檙e going to still honor kids鈥� ability to learn about their own identity and all kinds of identities.鈥�

Goldberg also said it would be a mistake for school administrators to place the burden of opt-outs on teachers. 鈥淭eachers are overwhelmed already, just getting through the curriculum,鈥� he said. Opt-outs are 鈥渁 compliance thing that districts are going to need to figure out.鈥�

The Scopes Monkey Trial

The country has a long history of science clashing with religion.

Driver, the Yale law professor, noted that in a 1987 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit overturned a lower court that ruled fundamentalist Christians could remove their children from public school lessons that depicted women working outside the home, which they argued conflicted with their religious beliefs. 

Now, following Alito鈥檚 decision in the Maryland case, the losing argument in that case could be successful, Driver said. 鈥淚t seems to me the Mahmoud versus Taylor decision empowered these sorts of objections to potentially carry the day.鈥�

Alito鈥檚 decision also came 100 years after the landmark court case on the teaching of evolution in public schools 鈥� the epic clash of science versus religion known as the Scopes Monkey Trial that pitted legendary lawyers Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan against each other. 

Jennings, hired to prosecute a high school biology teacher, John Scopes, for teaching evolution against state law, won. But Tennessee鈥檚 Supreme Court later overturned Scopes鈥� conviction, ruling that a state law banning the teaching of evolution in public schools was unconstitutional.

But it didn鈥檛 end the debate over teaching science in the face of religious beliefs, said Pepperdine University law and history professor Edward Larson, author of . When it ended, 鈥渟chool districts all over the country and some states banned the teaching of the theory of human evolution,鈥� he said.

Even when religious objections were later banned, 鈥渁 series of state laws and local actions calling for balanced treatment of either teaching creation science, along with evolution, or later intelligent design鈥� followed, Larson said. Several states, including Alabama, require disclaimers in biology books stating evolution 鈥渋s just a theory,鈥� he said.

鈥淭he issue of evolution in public schools remains a flash point,鈥� Larson said.&苍产蝉辫;鈥淚t has been for a hundred years, it still is today.鈥�

As the Alito decision plays out in the coming years, Larson said, 鈥淪chools may want to force people to provide all sorts of evidence鈥� to prove their sincerely held religious beliefs.&苍产蝉辫;鈥淏ut I鈥檓 thinking that most won鈥檛 feel it鈥檚 worth their time to get too engaged,鈥� he added. 

鈥淭hat鈥檚 just inviting trouble.鈥� 

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 麻豆精品鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.