Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor snapped at each other during Tuesday’s arguments over parental rights in LGBTQ curriculum after the liberal justice attempted to jump back into the questioning as Alito was speaking.
The short quarrel happened as the high court listened to arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor, in which a coalition of parents sought to solidify the right to be informed about and opt their children out of reading LGBTQ-related material in elementary schools — which they argue conflicts with their faith.
“There is a growing heat to the exchanges between the justices. Sotomayor just tried to disagree with Alito’s portrayal and Alito pushed back and asked to allow him to finish,” Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley observed on X.
Sotomayor initially asked Mahmoud attorney Eric Baxter about a particular book titled “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding” that included a same-sex relationship storyline and whether exposure to same-sex relationships in children’s books could be considered coercion.
PARENTS TELL SCOTUS: LGBTQ STORYBOOKS IN CLASSROOMS CLASH WITH OUR FAITH
“Our parents would object to that,” Baxter responded.
Sotomayor continued with her line of questioning to further clarify Baxter’s objection to the books. Baxter stated, “Our objections would be even to reading books that violate our client’s religious beliefs.”
Alito then jumped in with additional questions related to the book.
“I’ve read that book as well as a lot of these other books,” Alito began. “Do you think it’s fair to say that all that is done in ‘Uncle Bobby’s Wedding’ is to expose children to the fact that there are men who marry other men?”
Baxter objected to Alito’s question. Alito then said that while the book “has a clear message and a lot of people think it’s a good message,” some with “traditional religious beliefs don’t agree with” it.
As Alito continued with his explanation, Sotomayor jumped in.
“What a minute. The reservation is—” Sotomayor began.
‘LET US BE THE PARENTS’: SUPREME COURT SHOULD LET PARENTS OPT KIDS OUT OF LGBTQ SCHOOL LESSONS, LAWYER ARGUES
“Can I finish?” Alito said.
“It has a clear moral message, and it may be a good message. It’s just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with,” Alito finished.
As arguments wrapped, the Supreme Court appeared inclined to agree with the parents.
A coalition of Jewish, Christian and Muslim parents with elementary school children in Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland brought suit against the school board after it introduced new LGBTQ books into the curriculum as part of the district’s “inclusivity” initiative.
The curriculum change came after the state of Maryland enacted regulations seeking to promote “educational equity,” according to the petitioner’s brief filed with the high court.
THE SUPREME COURT APPEARS TO SIDE WITH PARENTS IN RELIGIOUS LIBERTY DISPUTE OVER STORYBOOKS
The parents lost both at the district court and the appellate level. The Fourth Circuit held that the parents had not shown how the policy violated the First Amendment.
The case comes at a time when President Donald Trump and his administration have prioritized educational and DEI-related reform upon starting his second term. The Supreme Court has notably also heard oral arguments this past term in other religious liberty and gender-related suits.
The high court heard oral arguments earlier this month in a suit brought by a Wisconsin-based Catholic charity group’s bid for tax relief. The decision could alter the current eligibility requirements for religious tax exemptions.
Fox News’ Bill Mears, Shannon Bream, and David Spunt contributed to this report.
Read the full article here
