Are cute children's books teaching kids about gender and sexuality? Supreme Court to weigh in

In the children’s picture book “Prince & Knight,” the handsome prince falls in love not with a princess, but with the knight who helps him defeat a dragon.

Officials in the Maryland school district that included the book – along with others with LGBTQ+ characters – into its reading program, say the story is no more about sex than are classic fairy tales with romantic themes like Cinderella and Snow White.

But to some parents, cute children's books are being used to teach ideas about gender and sexuality against their religion.

They say they should be able to get their elementary school children excused from class when any of the LGBTQ+ inclusive books are being used, the same way the Montgomery County school district allows older students to opt out of sex education instruction.

When the district refused, the parents sued.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will consider whether the school has unconstitutionally burdened the parents’ ability to freely exercise their religion under the First Amendment.

Their appeal is one of three religious rights casesthe Supreme Court is deciding in the coming weeks, and could be part of a recent trend of the court siding with religious rights advocates.

National organizations representing school boards and superintendents, which have not taken a position on the books being used in Maryland, warn about the potential wider impact of a court decision agreeing with the parents. Schools could face a “bewildering variety” of religious rights claims, they said in a filing that emphasized “the importance of deference to the decisions of local school officials.”

“Whatever rule the Court promulgates in this case will apply far beyond the circumstances of this dispute,” they wrote.

What are the controversial books?

Montgomery County Public Schools officials said they introduced a handful of books with LGBTQ+ characters into the reading curriculum at the start of the 2022-2023 school year as part of an effort to better reflect the community.

“In addition to helping students explore sentence structure, word choice, and style, the storybooks support students’ ability to empathize, connect, and collaborate with peers and encourage respect for all,” lawyers for the schools told the Supreme Court.

The school district is one of the nation’s largest and most ethnically and religiously diverse.

The book “Intersection Allies” features nine kids from different backgrounds, including Alejandra who uses a wheelchair while playing basketball; Adilah who wears a hijab in ballet class; and Kate, who prefers a superhero cape to “skirts and frills.”

In “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” Chloe’s favorite uncle gets married to another man.

"I’ve read so many comments talking about sex being inappropriate in books for kindergartners," author Sarah S. Brannen said in an interview with PEN America, a writers and free expression group. "There is no sex in my book. It’s a story about a family that ends with everyone dancing at a wedding."

In the alphabet primer “Pride Puppy,” children chase their dog through a pride parade. The parents who sued complain that the book “invites students barely old enough to tie their own shoes” to search for images that include “underwear,” “leather,” and “lip ring.” The school says the parents are trying to give a salacious bent to objects like a leather jacket. But since the lawsuit began, Montgomery County has stopped using “Pride Puppy” as well as “My Rainbow,” a book about a mom who makes a rainbow-colored wig for her transgender daughter.

Parents say private or homeschool is the only way to avoid conflict with religion

After various teachers, administrators and parents raised concerns about the effectiveness and age-appropriateness of the books, the school system allowed students to be excused when they were read in class. 

But officials said they had to stop that because the growing number of opt-out requests created other problems, such as high absenteeism and the difficulty of administering the absences. They also said students who believe the storybooks represent them and their families could face social stigma and isolation if classmates leave the room when the books are read.

The parents who then sued said they shouldn’t have to send their kids to private school or to homeschool to avoid instruction that goes against the tenets of their religions which include Islam, Catholicism and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

“Intentionally exposing our young, impressionable, elementary-aged son to activities and curriculum on sex, sexuality, and gender that undermine Islamic teaching on these subjects would be immoral and would conflict with our religious duty to raise our children in accordance with our faith,” parents Tamer Mahmoud and Enas Barakat said in a court filing about why they didn’t want their son to be part of his second grade class’s reading of “Prince & Knight.”

But a divided panel of appeals court judges said the parents hadn’t shown that they or their children had been coerced to believe or act contrary to their religious views.

Simply "hearing about other views does not necessarily exert pressure to believe or act differently than one's religious faith requires," 4th Circuit Appeals Court Judge G. Steven Agee wrote.

Are the books 'compelled instruction'?

Colt Stanberry, a lawyer with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which is representing the parents, said the books are “compelled instruction” when a teacher reads them to a class.

Even without any commentary from the teacher, Stanberry said, children know what’s being taught when, in “Born Ready,” a mother is supportive of her transgender son, saying: “Not everything needs to make sense. This is about love.”

Students are meant to learn that children can choose their own sex, the Becket Fund says.

School officials say no one is being asked to change how they feel about gender and sexuality. Instead, the books are meant to promote acceptance and respect and to show that the world is diverse.

Exposing students to ideas that clash with their parents’ religious beliefs does not violate their constitutional rights, they argue.

“Abandoning this longstanding principle would render public education unworkable,” lawyers for the school said in a filing.

Are objections to evolution next?

Outside groups – including the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers and the American Civil Liberties Union – echo that concern.

They say teachers would be left guessing what lessons or reading assignments might conflict with someone’s religious beliefs and would put judges in the position of policing day-to-day curricular decisions, homework assignments and classroom-management techniques.

Could a student with same-sex parents give a presentation on his family tree? Can teachers talk about historical figures, such as astronaut Sally Ride, who happen to be gay?

“In other words, the principles that apply to kindergarten parents seeking to prevent their child from being exposed to Pride Puppy will also apply to the parents of a high-school or middle-school student who wish to prevent their ninth grader from being exposed to evolution or their sixth grader being exposed to any pictures of girls who are not wearing a hijab,” attorneys for the School Superintendents Association and the Consortium of State School Boards Associations said in a filing.

Stanberry, the Becket Fund attorney, said he doesn’t expect a tidal wave of religious opt-out requests if the Supreme Court sides with the Maryland parents. Schools know what the sensitive areas are and have usually allowed the kind of opt-outs being requested in Montgomery County.

“I don’t think we're really asking for something,” he said, “that’s going to blow the whole system up.”

A decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor is expected by the end of June.