LAWS, STATUTES, AND OPINIONS
​
Mahmoud v. Taylor Case Summary
​
Background: In Mahmoud v. Taylor, parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, challenged the school district’s policy on LGBTQ+-themed storybooks in elementary classrooms.
​
The Dispute: The Montgomery County Board of Education integrated LGBTQ+-inclusive storybooks into the curriculum. Initially, parents could opt out, but the district later eliminated this option, citing administrative challenges and a commitment to inclusion. Parents from diverse religious backgrounds claimed the no-opt-out policy violated their First Amendment religious freedom and parental rights.
​
Lower Court Rulings: The district court rejected the parents’ request for a preliminary injunction, a decision upheld by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
​
Supreme Court Decision: On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the parents, finding that the no-opt-out policy infringed on their First Amendment right to free exercise of religion.
​
Impact: The court’s ruling strengthens parental rights and religious liberty, affirming parents’ ability to shape their children’s education according to their beliefs. It stated, “A welcoming classroom cannot be achieved through hostility toward students’ and parents’ religious beliefs.”
SUPREME COURT RULING
Allowing Parents to OPT OUT of Lessons Contrary to Religious Beliefs
The Pavement Education Project supports the passage of HB 636: Promoting Wholesome Content. Read and sign the Petition.
RECENT NORTH CAROLINA STATUTES
​​​​
Recently HB 805: Prevent Sexual Exploitation of Women and Minors passed with a veto override. The bill defines sex as biological male or female, bans taxpayer-funded gender-transition procedures for inmates and restricts them for minors, extends malpractice lawsuit windows, mandates age verification for online pornography, regulates school sleeping arrangements, ensures parental opt-out rights for conflicting classroom materials, and makes school library catalogs searchable with parental controls.
​
Gov Stein signed SB 442: Parents Protection Act into law. The Parents Protection Act, protects parents from losing custody or facing prosecution for refusing gender-affirming treatments for their children. It addresses cases where courts or social services deem non-affirmation as maltreatment, safeguarding parental rights and religious freedoms.
NC Statutes That Impact Children, Education, and Parental Rights.
Parents and Guardians send their children to school with expectations that they will receive a good education, and have access to appropriate materials and texts. They also expect an environment in which their child's physical and mental health is protected. Content defined as obscene is now included in libraries and classrooms by North Carolina Statute § 14-190.13 Definitions for certain offenses concerning minors.
​
Content may show graphic images or have descriptions of sexual acts. Please take note of North Carolina Statute § 14-190.15. Disseminating harmful material to minors; exhibiting harmful performances to minors. It allows a defense for schools, libraries, and museums to have a pass. No one ever thought such inappropriate literature would appear within the walls of a school. We must work with legislators to make the changes needed to protect children from age inappropriate and harmful content.
The Parents' Bill of Rights. § 115C-76.55. (SB 49) addresses the requirement for age-appropriate instruction for grades kindergarten through fourth grade. It states that " instruction on gender identity, sexual activity, or sexuality shall not be included in the curriculum provided in grades kindergarten through fourth grade, regardless of whether the information is provided by school personnel or third parties." It also prohibits the use of inappropriate inappropriate core and supplementary materials. Look at your child's school district and school on this website to see if there are inappropriate materials available to your child.
Some books and materials available in schools may be in violation of NC General Statute 115C-81.30. Reproductive Health and Safety Education. This content and subject matter may lead children to question their own sexual identity.
The Pavement Education Project team working with concerned citizens have identified a selection of books believed to be in violation of North Carolina General Statutes Chapter 14. Criminal Law § 14-190.1. Obscene literature and exhibitions. Other North Carolina General Statutes regarding Materials Harmful to Minors. Read Subchapter VII Offenses Against Public Morality and Decency Article 26 for the entire statute, definitions, and related offenses toward minors. Contact your legislators with your concerns related to this statute and the intent of the law.
The PEP website shows books, book lists, and related information under the BOOKS tab. North Carolina school districts, books, and links to excerpts are shown under the LOCATIONS tab. If you are interested in assisting with book searches in your NC school district, we can help you get started. Book banning is not the focus, but the appropriateness of such books in a public school setting is questionable.
​​​​​​
​
SB 808: An Act to Prohibit Gender Transition Procedures for MinorsGender Transition for Minors limits medical transitioning procedures or to prescribe, provide, or dispense puberty-blocking drugs or cross-sex hormones to a minor. The statute makes provision for children that have disorders, under treatments for a variety of medical maladies, or suffer physiological abnormalities. The statute outlines penalties for violation of the statute.
​
HOUSE BILL 574: Fairness in Women's Sports Act also became law. It will "prohibit male students from playing on middle school, high school, or collegiate athletics teams designated for females, women, or girls". It also will "require a student's sex to be recognized solely based on reproductive biology and genetics at birth for purposes of athletic participation."
​
Changes in laws affecting charter schools were enacted in HB 219: The Charter School Omnibus. It clarifies requirements of charter application and renewal. It addresses enrollment in low performing schools. Admittance of out of state students and children of military families are also outlined.
​
​
Other Important NC Statutes
SUPREME COURT RULINGS AND DECISIONS RELATED TO BOOKS AND LITERATURE
The Miller Test is the primary legal test for determining whether expression constitutes obscenity. It is named after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Miller v. California (1973).
​
The Miller Test is a three-prong legal standard used to determine if material is considered obscene. It requires that the average person, applying contemporary community standards, find:
1) the material appeals to the prurient interest (a sexual interest)
2) the material depicts or describes patently offensive sexual conduct defined by law
3) the material, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
​
​
Island Tree School District VS Pico
In the Supreme Court case Island Trees School District v. Pico (1982), the Court held that the First Amendment limits the power of junior high and high school officials to remove books from school libraries because of their content.
The Supreme Court ruled in the students’ favor on First Amendment grounds, holding that the right to read is implied by the First Amendment. The government—in this case, a public school—cannot restrict speech because it does not agree with the content of that speech. The decisions called libraries places for “voluntary inquiry” and concluded that the school board’s “absolute discretion” over the classroom did not extend to the library for that reason.
The ruling also established that public schools can remove books from libraries if they are deemed "pervasively vulgar" or not suitable for the curriculum. However, schools cannot remove books simply because they disagree with the ideas presented in those books. The ruling acknowledges the First Amendment rights of students to access information, while also allowing for school boards to exercise reasonable control over the educational environment.
​
Case v. Unified School District (1995)
​
This case concerned the removal of Annie on My Mind, a book about a lesbian relationship, from the Olathe, Kansas, school district’s high school libraries. The book’s removal was challenged as a violation of the First Amendment. The U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas ruled that the school district’s decision to remove the book violated the First Amendment rights of students. The court found that the removal was motivated by the school board’s disagreement with the book’s content rather than any legitimate educational concerns. The book was ordered to be returned to the school libraries.
2025 Proposed NC Legislation Related to
Education and Children
