This article was updated at 5:08 p.m. to include reaction from the Council on American-Islamic Relations and Montgomery County Public Schools.
A federal judge on Thursday denied a motion for injunction that would have temporarily forced Montgomery County Public Schools to rescind its no-opt-out approach to reading elementary-level LGBTQ+ inclusive materials in class.
The lawsuit stems from a controversy over the school district’s decision not to provide prior notice or allow parents to remove their students from the classroom when an LGBTQ+ inclusive storybook is utilized. The policy was first articulated publicly in March, and three MCPS families filed a lawsuit against the school board and superintendent in May.
Over the summer, Muslim and Christian families rallied outside school board headquarters, presented testimony to the board and circulated petitions demanding the district reinstate the accommodation. Other parents, students and officials have vocalized their support for the school district’s approach to its inclusive curriculum, and a petition of support has garnered over 3,000 signatures since June 16.
On Aug. 9, attorneys for the plaintiffs and defense fielded questions from U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman for over three hours as she entertained plaintiffs’ motion for injunction, which would have forced the school district to reinstate the opt-out until the lawsuit’s ultimate conclusion. Boardman said she planned to issue a ruling before the start of school on Aug. 28.
Boardman issued her ruling Thursday, accompanied by a 60-page memorandum shedding light on her legal justification for denying the plaintiffs’ motion.
“This case involves objections to a public-school curriculum,” the memorandum reads. “The Fourth Circuit has not addressed the question of when a mandatory public-school curriculum might burden the religious exercise of students or parents. Other courts have. Every court that has addressed the question has concluded that the mere exposure in public school to ideas that contradict religious beliefs does not burden the religious exercise of students or parents.”
Boardman’s memorandum continues:
“The parents still may instruct their children on their religious beliefs regarding sexuality, marriage, and gender, and each family may place contrary views in its religious context. No government action prevents the parents from freely discussing the topics raised in the storybooks with their children or teaching their children as they wish.”
Also on Thursday, the Board of Education gathered for a regularly scheduled meeting at the Carver Educational Services Center in Rockville. Continuing a trend that began when the lawsuit was filed in May, the meeting’s public comments section was dominated by testimony from parents advocating for and against the opt-out accommodation.
One parent submitted a petition signed by 172 other community members asking principals to remove the storybooks from the curriculum altogether. The petition asks for principals to “make sure the six books that display LGTBQ sexual character, ideology, and behavior, not to be used in the classroom as they have irreversible negative impact on children [sic] mental health.”
Trans Maryland’s executive director, Lee Blinder, also submitted testimony as co-chair of the Coalition for Inclusive Schools and Communities, a recently formed group in support of the school district’s approach to its curriculum.
“We know that the way forward is through love,” Blinder’s testimony reads. “Love envisions a future where openly LGBTQIA+ teachers, students, families, and guardians are embraced as a part of our society.”
The Council on American-Islamic Relations—a Muslim advocacy group that has staunchly supported pro-opt-out efforts—issued a statement Thursday afternoon reacting to Boardman’s ruling. The statement emphasized CAIR’s intent to continue supporting families’ pursuit of “every available legal means to protect their rights” when it comes to their students’ education.
“We remain committed to vocally advocating for families who simply want their children to attend English class without being forced to discuss and affirm sensitive concepts that would normally arise in sex education courses,” it reads.
MCPS issued its own statement on the ruling, specifically citing Boardman’s reasoning that “public schools are not obliged to shield individual students from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive, particularly when the school imposes no requirement that the student violate his or her faith during classroom instruction.”
The statements reads: “MCPS remains committed to cultivating an inclusive and welcoming learning environment and creating opportunities where all students see themselves and their families in curriculum materials.”
The lawsuit will continue to move forward, though a trial date has not yet been set. In the meantime, the school district’s 2023-24 school year officially kicks off on Monday, and elementary schools will continue to operate without an opt-out option for LGBTQ+ inclusive curriculum.