Montgomery County’s unneeded Supreme Court fight

 

“What’s the big deal?” This was the very pertinent question posed by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. during Tuesday’s oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor. Why has the defendant — the Montgomery County, Maryland, school district — come before the Supreme Court with what should have been a minor administrative issue?

In 2022, Montgomery County introduced into its language arts curriculum a set of books that affirm LGBTQ+ identities. As with other material that might conflict with families’ religious values, such as sex education, the district allowed parents an opt-out. Then, it abruptly rescinded that option and refused to reconsider, even after some parents sued.

This is how Alan Schoenfeld, the school district’s lawyer, ended up in court trying to explain to Alito why the district was unable to accommodate parents with religious objections. “The plaintiffs here are not asking the school to change its curriculum,” Alito pointed out. “They’re just saying, look, we want out. Why isn’t that feasible? What is the big deal about allowing them to opt out of this?”

Schoenfeld tried to argue that the administrative burden was too great but, when asked why it was so much greater than the opt-outs available for health class, he appeared to struggle, finally responding that those opt-outs were mandated by state law, whereas the reading opt-outs were not...

https://wapo.st/4lM34Ok