Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown (D) is helping to lead a coalition of attorneys general in an amicus brief to support the Montgomery County school board’s policy for students to participate in classroom discussions when books mention LGBTQ+ characters.

The brief, filed Tuesday, requests that the U.S. Fourth District Court of Appeals uphold a District Court judge’s decision made this summer denying Montgomery County families a preliminary injunction to immediately opt their children out of lessons and to require the school system to give them advance notice of when such a book was to be discussed.

“Our schools play a fundamental role in shaping the minds and hearts of the next generation, and it’s our duty to ensure that every child feels safe, supported, and valued,” Brown said in a statement. “Educational policies that promote respect for LGBTQ+ people will help build a more equitable future for all children.”

The attorneys general argue the county’s policy doesn’t violate Maryland law, doesn’t strip a parent’s religious freedom for their children and provides parents due process rights under the 14th Amendment.

In addition, courts have ruled public schools are obligated to educate all children.

“Public schools are not obliged to shield individual students from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive, particularly when the school imposes no requirement that the student agree with or affirm those ideas, or even participate in discussions about them,” according to the brief. “Whatever religious beliefs students or their families may hold, it cannot be constitutionally problematic to familiarize students with LGBTQ+ people, who exist and are an integral part of communities in every part of the country.”

Joining Brown to co-lead the argument is Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell (D).

The other attorneys general on the brief are from California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, the state of Washington and Washington, D.C.

Another amicus brief filed this week in support of Montgomery County comes from several LGBTQ+ advocacy groups such as the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Human Rights Campaign Foundation and GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network).

That brief notes a March report from the U.S. Department of Education that stated “school climates that foster a sense of belonging and community not only provide a more supportive learning environment in which children learn to respect those who differ from them, but also report better test scores, graduation rates, student engagement, mental and physical health, and brain development.”

Meanwhile, the Montgomery County plaintiffs filed a reply Wednesday to urge the appeals court to revert to the policy that was set in the 2022-23 school year. The plaintiffs argue that opting out is allowed in every other jurisdiction.

The reply submitted by Eric Baxter, vice president and senior counsel with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, contends that the school board allowing books with LGTBQ characters interferes with a parent’s religious beliefs and “violates their most sacred duty.”

“The Parents seek only to restore the opt-out rights already required by Maryland law and Board policy – rights still permitted for all instruction except the Pride Storybooks,” according to the plaintiffs. “The Parents’ pre-existing notice and opt-out rights should be restored.”

Source : Maryland Matters

The post Brown Co-Leads Support on Montgomery County School Board Opt-Out Policy appeared first on Policy Print.

Details included in court proceedings Tuesday have revealed that Saskatchewan’s Ministry of Education developed its pronoun consent policy over the span of nine days before it was announced in August.

The timeframe was spoken of during submissions from both applicant and respondent counsel during an injunction hearing on Tuesday, sourced from an affidavit of assistant deputy minister Michael Walter submitted by the provincial government.

The injunction has been requested by UR Pride Centre for Gender and Sexual Diversity, as part of an originating application filed against the province challenging the constitutionality of the policy.

UR Pride counsel Adam Goldenberg raised the detail first, stating the policy “went from zero to a final version in nine days in August,” according to Walter’s statement.

He argued that this detail is relevant to UR Pride’s stance that proper consultation during development was not done, meaning the policy does not serve the public good.

“Experts could not have been consulted, there was not time,” he told sitting justice Michael Megaw.

The government’s counsel Mitch McAdam countered that the expediency of development is not indicative of the policy’s integrity.

“The fact this policy was put together quickly does not do away with the presumption of public interest in any way,” he said.

Premier Scott Moe also responded Wednesday morning, calling the claim of a nine-day timeline “not correct.”

“This is a policy that’s been discussed at the elected level of government for some period of time,” he said.

“Most certainly, there’s broad support for this policy across Saskatchewan. That’s why the government is ultimately committed to ensuring its implementation today and into the future.”

Former and current ministers of education Dustin Duncan and Jeremy Cockrill have previously been asked who was consulted when creating the policy, but have not provided any specifics to date.

Provincial children and youth advocate Lisa Broda expressed similar concerns over consultation to those raised by UR Pride in her report released last week examining the policy.

The Saskatchewan School Boards Association has also made clear that school divisions were not consulted.

Leader-Post asked the Ministry of Education if further context of that timeline could be provided, but the ministry was not able to do so by the time of publication Wednesday.

Those in court Tuesday also heard that according to Walter, the Minister of Education’s office received 18 letters between June and the policy’s release in August expressing concern about pronoun usage in schools.

Eleven letter writers did not identify themselves as parents of school age children. Most were speaking to New Brunswick’s recently announced Policy 713, not to Saskatchewan.

Goldenberg said the province declined to attach those letters in the affidavit or provide them to his legal team.

Government officials have not publicly provided a clear number on how many letters or emails were received from concerned parents about this topic, stating only there have been a number in contact with MLAs on the issue.

In an emailed response provided Wednesday, a spokesperson from the Ministry of Justice and Attorney General advised the Walter affidavit is “only one snapshot” of evidence to be advanced by government in this case, which continues in November.

Moe also reiterated previous statements on Wednesday that he remains open to using the notwithstanding clause to counter a successful injunction order.

“We’ll use the tools to ensure the policy ultimately is in place,” he said.

Source : Regina Leader Post

The post Sask. Ministry Developed Pronoun Policy in Nine Days, Hears Court appeared first on Policy Print.