During Tuesday's oral arguments for 'Mahmoud v. Taylor' Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned an attorney about books relating to family life.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Mr. Sotomayor.
00:01The injunction here, sought by defendants, asks for two things.
00:06Parents notice an opportunity to opt their children out of reading,
00:11listening to, or discussing the Pride storybooks.
00:16The injunction presumably would require what you say is not required,
00:20to take the books off the shelf, correct?
00:23No, I don't think that's what they're requesting at all,
00:24and petitioners seem to have disclaimed that.
00:26Petitioners are saying they would like the ability to—
00:29They basically want the status quo—
00:30To opt out from forcing the child to read the book.
00:33So they want the child to be—
00:33But that's not the words used here.
00:35Yes, they want the child to be outside of the classroom if they are exposed to the book.
00:39They want the status quo ante that Montgomery County previously offered.
00:41All right, so—but you're not objecting either to having the books on the bookshelf in the classroom.
00:46We don't understand that to be the claim here.
00:49All right.
00:49Now, they also ask the court to, quote,
00:51And join defendants from denying them advance notice and opportunity to opt their children out of any other instruction
01:00related to family life or human sexuality that violates the parents' or their children's religious beliefs.
01:09Is that an enforceable injunction?
01:11Is that an enforceable injunction?
01:13I don't know what related to family life would mean.
01:16It could be any picture, any book that talks about people getting married.
01:24Interracial couples.
01:25I think it's defined by the contours of their particular claim
01:28and by the way in which Montgomery County and the state of Maryland have defined topics.
01:31We require injunctions to be more precise than that.
01:35I think regardless of how the court feels with respect to the specificity of this injunction,
01:40it seems pretty definite in the context of the case.
01:43And with respect to the question presented,
01:44whether there is a burden if parents are not able to have the advance notice of opt-out of the material
01:50that their religious obligations prohibit, that's a clear burden.