Mahmoud v. Taylor (24-297)

argument 24-297

Mahmoud v. Taylor

Supreme Court of the United States 2h 29m 8 speakers 4 chapters transcribed 1 month ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · speakers · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

Why do parents claim a right to control sexuality and gender‑identity instruction in schools?

John G. Roberts 0:00

We will hear argument first this morning in case 24297,

Mr. Baxter 0:04

Mahmoud v. Taylor. Mr. Baxter? Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court, parents everywhere care about how their young children are taught sexuality and gender identity. That's why nearly every public school in the country that provides sexuality education requires parental consent first. But Montgomery County is an extreme outlier, insisting that every elementary school student must be instructed that among other controversial matters, doctors guessed at their sex when they were born and that anyone who disagrees is hurtful and unfair. Forcing petitioners to submit their children to such instruction violates their religious beliefs and directly interferes with their ability to direct the religious upbringing of their children.

Mr. Baxter 0:49

The board claims this straightforward burden analysis will invite chaos, but schools nationwide have long applied expansive opt-out policies without significant difficulty, including the board itself, which still allows opt-outs for choir students who object to singing religious songs or students who object to certain storybooks, such as one that portrays an image of the prophet Muhammad. Exempting students for some religious reasons but not others cannot be squared with the First Amendment. Nowhere else to go, the board pleads for remand on strict scrutiny, but petitioners have been seeking preliminary relief for two years already at significant personal expense. One family moved in with grandparents to afford private school.

Mr. Baxter 1:30

Another is homeschooling at the loss of $25,000 a year in special services the school provided their daughter with Down syndrome. Most have no alternatives. Petitioners deserve complete preliminary relief. In a system where thousands of students are daily opted in and out of the class for multiple reasons, there's no basis for denying opt-outs for religious reasons. The Board does not dispute that under its theory, it could compel instruction using pornography, and parents would have no rights. The First Amendment demands more. Parents, not school boards, should have the final say on such religious matters. I welcome the Court's questions.

Clarence Thomas 2:09

Could you... spend a minute or two to explain why the record shows that the children are more than merely exposed to these sorts of things in the storybooks?

Mr. Baxter 2:27

Yes, Your Honor. I would start with the books themselves. The books themselves teach, for example, that

Clarence Thomas 2:32

children... I mean, what I'm talking about is not necessarily what the books say, but rather is that Are the books just there and no more, or are they actually being taught out of the books?

Mr. Baxter 2:46

No, we know that the teachers are required to use the books. When the books were first introduced in August of 2022, the board suggested they be used five times before the end of the year. That's at 273A in the cert appendix. One of the schools, the Sherwood School in June for Pride Month, said that they were going to read one book each day to celebrate Pride Month. The board's own testimony through Superintendent Hazel said that the books must be used as part of the instruction and that at 642 in the appendix, that discussion will ensue. That was the entire point of withdrawing the opt-outs and removing even notifying parents. They're not even allowed to know. The board said in that statement it was so that every student would be taught from the inclusivity storybooks.

Mr. Baxter 3:33

And also the district court transcript at 63 has counsel's admission that Some of the books have to be used, and it can be more.

John G. Roberts 3:39

The school board alleges that the opt-out system became unworkable. Is that a factor we should take into account in deciding whether it could be required?

Mr. Baxter 3:53

Certainly, there could be situations where it could be unworkable. The board never raised that until after this litigation commenced. When they announced the withdrawal, they said it was because every student needed to read the inclusivity books. When they produced documents in response to an open records request, there was no mention of...