The US Supreme Court on Friday granted a preliminary injunction to a group of Maryland parents challenging their school board’s mandatory instruction of LGBTQ+ themed storybooks in elementary schools. The court stated that the introduction of the books, combined with the parents’ inability to opt their children out of the instruction, “places an unconstitutional burden on the parents’ rights to the free exercise of their religion.”

In a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito, the court permitted the parents to remove their children from the LGBTQ+ themed instruction while the lawsuit proceeds. Alito stated that the court has “long recognized” parents’ rights to direct their children’s religious upbringings and “that those rights are violated by government policies that ‘substantially interfer[e] with the religious development’ of children.”

Alito said the books were “unmistakably normative” and “designed to present certain values and beliefs to be celebrated, and certain contrary values and beliefs as things to be rejected.” The court thus rejected the school board’s argument that the storybooks were merely introduced to bring exposure to different ideas and encourage respect.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed concern over the ruling’s impact on the nature of public education and children’s development. She emphasized that public schools allow children the ability to live in a multicultural society, an experience that “is critical to our Nation’s civic vitality.” She added, “Yet it will become a mere memory if children must be insulated from exposure to ideas and concepts that may conflict with their parents’ religious beliefs.”

Sotomayor critiqued the majority opinion as “casting aside longstanding precedent” and “inventing a constitutional right,” noting that the decision will impose significant administrative burdens on public schools. She stated, “The reverberations of the Court’s error will be felt, I fear, for generations. Unable to condone that grave misjudgment, I dissent.”

The Montgomery County Board of Education introduced the “LGBTQ+-inclusive” books in its 2022 elementary school curriculum, later informing parents that it would not provide them with advance notice of the books’ use and prohibiting parents from opting their children out of the instruction.

Several parents sued the school board, asserting that the opt-out policy burdened their right to freely exercise their religion under the First Amendment. A lower court found that the school board’s policy was likely consistent with the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, and the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed. The appellate court found that the parents did not show direct or indirect coercion arising out of the exposure to the storybooks and that they therefore could not succeed.

The Supreme Court’s decision on Friday reversed the appellate court’s ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings.