Montgomery County to Pay $1.5 Million to Parents After Supreme Court Ruling

Feb 26, 2026, 2:30 AM
Image for article Montgomery County to Pay $1.5 Million to Parents After Supreme Court Ruling

Hover over text to view sources

The Montgomery County Board of Education in Maryland has been mandated to pay $1.5 million to a coalition of religious parents following a ruling by the US Supreme Court concerning parental rights in education. This decision arises from a lawsuit initiated by a diverse group of parents, including Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who opposed the school district's introduction of LGBTQ+-themed instructional materials without parental consent.
The Supreme Court ruled on the case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, in June 2025, stating that the right of parents to guide their children's religious upbringing extends into public school classrooms. The court emphasized that parental rights would be undermined if schools could dictate educational content without notifying parents, thereby infringing upon their First Amendment rights.
The financial settlement and accompanying injunction were confirmed by US District Judge Deborah L. Boardman, who noted that the Montgomery County Board of Education must now provide advance notice to parents whenever instructional materials addressing family life and human sexuality will be used in the classroom. Parents will also retain the right to opt their children out of such instruction if it conflicts with their religious beliefs.
Eric Baxter, senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and lead attorney for the parents, expressed that this ruling serves as a significant victory for parental rights. He stated, “Public schools nationwide are on notice: running roughshod over parental rights and religious freedom isn't just illegal—it's costly.”.
The case originated in the 2022-2023 academic year when Montgomery County schools introduced various LGBTQ+-themed books into their curricula for grades as early as pre-kindergarten. Some of these books included titles such as "Born Ready," which tells the story of a child identifying as a boy, and "Jacob's Room to Choose," which addresses transgender issues. The school initially allowed parents to opt their children out of certain health education classes but later revoked this option for language arts classes, prompting the lawsuit.
The Supreme Court's majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, highlighted the importance of parental oversight in children's education, stating, “The right of parents to direct the religious upbringing of their children would be an empty promise if it did not follow those children into the public school classroom.” This ruling is seen as a pivotal moment for parental rights, especially in the context of religious objections to educational content.
In addition to financial damages, the settlement requires the Montgomery County Board of Education to implement ongoing procedures ensuring that parents are adequately informed about the materials being used in classrooms. This includes sending out emails before each marking period detailing the instructional materials approved for each grade level.
Montgomery County Public Schools has indicated that it is already taking steps to comply with the court's mandate and has revised its opt-out process. A spokesperson stated that the school system aims to improve its responsiveness to parents and to foster a partnership between families and the school district.
The implications of this ruling extend beyond Montgomery County, as it sets a precedent for other school districts across the country regarding parental rights and the inclusion of LGBTQ+ content in curricula. As Eric Baxter noted, this decision could encourage other parents to assert their rights in similar situations, reinforcing the importance of parental involvement in educational content.
The settlement reached between the Montgomery County Board of Education and the parents marks a significant development in the ongoing conversation about educational content and parental rights in the United States. With the legal battles concluded, both parties now look to the future and the steps necessary to rebuild trust between the school district and the families it serves.

Related articles

Fifth Circuit Court Ruling: Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law Sparks Debate

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of Louisiana's Ten Commandments law, which critics argue effectively establishes a state religion. This ruling has reignited discussions on the intersection of religion and government in the United States, particularly in light of previous Supreme Court decisions on similar matters.

Right-Wing Media Gains Momentum with Hegseth and Trump Initiatives

Recent developments in right-wing media have highlighted the influence of figures like Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump in promoting religious themes in American politics. Their initiatives signal a strong push towards intertwining faith with governance, resonating with a significant segment of the conservative base.

HUD Investigates EPIC for Alleged Religious Discrimination in The Meadow Project

The US Department of Housing and Urban Development is investigating the East Plano Islamic Center, also known as EPIC, over allegations of religious discrimination in its upcoming project, The Meadow. The inquiry follows a complaint from the Texas Workforce Commission, highlighting concerns of discriminatory practices in the planned community's development.

Trump's Religious Revival: A New Era of Faith in US Government

Under Donald Trump's presidency, a significant religious revival has emerged within the US government, leading to debates over the separation of church and state. Initiatives promoting religious expression in public life have gained traction, supported by conservative organizations but raising concerns about constitutional boundaries.

Hijacking Trump's Religious Liberty Council: A Critical Examination

The establishment of President Trump's Religious Liberty Council has sparked controversy as many believe it prioritizes the interests of specific religious groups over the broader principles of religious freedom. Critics argue that the council's activities may lead to discrimination under the guise of protecting religious liberty, raising concerns about its implications for vulnerable communities.