A federal court in Maryland has ruled that parents cannot choose to exclude their children from classes containing LGBTQ+ content within Montgomery County Schools.

Image Credit: Shutterstock.The court’s decision comes from a case where parents aimed to reinstate a policy within Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) that would permit them to opt their kids out of reading and discussing books featuring LGBTQ+ characters at elementary school level.

She ruled that the parents’ claim of a due process right to direct their children’s education by opting out of lessons conflicting with their religious convictions is not a fundamental right.

She said: “Because the plaintiffs have not established any of their claims is likely to succeed on the merits, the court need not address the remaining preliminary injunction factors.

Nonetheless, because a constitutional violation is not likely or imminent, it follows that the plaintiffs are not likely to suffer imminent irreparable harm, and the balance of the equities and the public interest favor denying an injunction to avoid undermining the school board’s legitimate interests in the no-opt-out policy.”

Image Credit: Shutterstock.She continued: “The plaintiffs seek the same relief pending appeal as in their preliminary injunction motion – an injunction that requires the board to provide advance notice and opt-outs from instruction involving the storybooks and family life and human sexuality.

Image Credit: Shutterstock.The homophobic outrage began when MCPS introduced over 22 new books featuring LGBTQ+ characters into classrooms as part of an inclusivity initiative.

Initially, the school district allowed parents to opt their children out of these materials and provided notice of their use in class.

Christian families argued that the new policy conflicted with their First Amendment right to guide the religious education of their children.

Image Credit: Shutterstock.Judge Boardman countered the argument, stating that the no-opt-out policy does not force parents to cease teaching their faiths, act against their religious beliefs, or alter their convictions.

Image Credit: Shutterstock.Eric Baxter, the vice president at the law firm representing the families, criticized the ruling and claimed that it goes against parental freedom, childhood innocence, and fundamental human decency.

He said: “The court’s decision is an assault on children’s right to be guided by their parents on complex and sensitive issues regarding human sexuality.