Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland has now spent millions of taxpayer dollars learning a lesson it refused to accept voluntarily: Parents have rights, and courts will enforce them.
Last week, the Montgomery County Board of Education agreed to pay $1.5 million in damages and submit to court-enforced protections for parental rights following the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor. The settlement requires the district to provide parents with advance notice when instructional materials addressing family life and human sexuality will be used and to allow families to opt their children out of that instruction. It also places the district under ongoing court supervision to ensure compliance. After years of resistance, the board is being required to do what it could have done from the beginning: respect the constitutional rights of the families it serves.
The underlying dispute began when the school board eliminated parental notice and opt-out provisions for storybooks that introduced themes of gender transitioning, pride parades, and pronoun preferences to children as young as 3 and 4 years old. Parents objected not because they feared exposure to different viewpoints, but because they believed that deeply held religious convictions entitled them to decide if and how and when those subjects were introduced to their very young children. Rather than seek compromise, the board chose confrontation, framing parental concerns as obstacles to be managed rather than rights to be honored.
Last summer, the Supreme Court decisively rejected that approach. Writing for the 6-3 majority, Justice Samuel Alito made clear that “the right of parents ‘to direct the religious upbringing of their’ children would be an empty promise if it did not follow those children into the public school classroom.” The court reaffirmed a principle that predates the Constitution itself: While the state may provide education, it does not replace parents as the primary moral and religious guides of their children.
Yet Montgomery County forced families to fight all the way to the nation’s highest court to vindicate that principle. And now Montgomery County taxpayers are footing the bill.
Under the terms of the settlement, the board must pay $1.5 million to Becket’s clients — the families who stood up to challenge the policy. As Eric Baxter, senior counsel at Becket and lead attorney for the parents, put it bluntly: “Public schools nationwide are on notice: running roughshod over parental rights and religious freedom isn’t just illegal — it’s costly.” His statement captures what this episode ultimately represents: a reminder that constitutional rights are not optional, and ignoring them has financial consequences.
This is not the first payout arising from Montgomery County’s decision to wage a legal battle against parents. Earlier in this broader dispute, the district paid $125,000 to resolve a related First Amendment lawsuit brought by my colleague Matt Foldi and me. That settlement, too, came from public funds. Taken together, these payments, plus the cost of the litigation that reached the Supreme Court, represent millions of dollars that could have gone toward improving classroom instruction, addressing learning loss, supporting teachers, or expanding student services. Instead, those resources were diverted to defend a policy the Supreme Court ultimately found unlawful.
The most troubling aspect of this saga is not merely the money, but the mindset that led to its expenditure. Montgomery County leaders made a conscious decision to escalate rather than accommodate. They chose to test constitutional boundaries in federal court rather than acknowledge that parents with sincere religious objections deserved basic procedural protections. In doing so, they treated families as adversaries rather than partners and turned a solvable policy disagreement into a costly legal confrontation.
Rosalind Hanson, one of the plaintiffs and chairwoman of the Montgomery County chapter of Moms for Liberty, aptly described the significance of the settlement when she told the Washington Examiner, “Today’s settlement is a reminder that parents have not just a fundamental right but fundamental responsibility to defend and protect their religious beliefs.”
Her statement underscores that this case was never about banning books or silencing speech — it was about ensuring that parents retain a meaningful role in shaping their own children’s moral and religious development.
It is worth emphasizing what the settlement actually requires. The district is not barred from teaching its chosen curriculum — the books in question are not prohibited. The agreement simply restores advance notice and opt-outs for families whose faith compels them to take a different approach. That modest protection, one that respects both public education and parental conscience, could have been implemented years ago without litigation. Instead, it required a Supreme Court ruling and multiple financial settlements.
The implications extend far beyond Montgomery County. School districts across the country are watching closely, and so are parents. The Supreme Court’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor reaffirmed that public schools cannot override religious parental rights in the name of their own political ideology. The subsequent settlement reinforces that defiance of that ruling will carry tangible costs. For districts tempted to sidestep similar concerns, this case stands as a cautionary tale.
THE SUPREME COURT GOT IT RIGHT
Montgomery County now faces an opportunity to recalibrate its approach. Continued resistance will only deepen division and drain additional resources from classrooms into courtrooms. Taxpayers deserve a school system focused on academic excellence rather than ideological brinkmanship. Families deserve a district that views them as stakeholders, not litigants.
The judiciary has delivered a clear message: Constitutional protections for parental rights do not evaporate at the schoolhouse gate. The board would do well to heed that message moving forward. After years of costly litigation, the lesson should be unmistakable. Respect for parents is not merely a political preference — it is a constitutional obligation. And ignoring that obligation, as Montgomery County has now learned, is a very expensive mistake.