Mahmoud et al v. McKnight et al

On May 24, 2023, Tamer Mahmoud and Enas Barakat, Jeff and Svitlana Roman, and Chris and Melissa Persak (collectively, “the Parents”), in their individual capacities and ex rel. their minor children (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), represented by James C. Mehigan of Mehigan Law Group PLLC; and William J. Huan, Michael O’Brien, and Brandon L. Winchel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, filed a civil rights lawsuit against Montgomery County Public Schools (“MCPS”), the Montgomery County Board of Education, Karla Silvestre, Shebra Evans, Grace Rivera-Oven, Rebecca Smondrowski, Julie Yang, Brenda Wolff, and Lynne Harris (collectively, “Defendants”), seeking injunctive relief and damages for alleged violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, with Judge Timothy J. Sullivan presiding. 

In the complaint, the plaintiffs alleged, “This lawsuit against the Montgomery County Board of Education and its superintendent and board members (collectively, the ‘School Board’) is about whether parents have the right to opt their children out of classroom instruction regarding family life and human sexuality.”

Plaintiffs alleged, “Maryland law says ‘yes.’ COMAR 13A.04.18.01(D)(2)(e)(iv), (i)-(ii). Pursuant to written policy, the School Board has always said ‘yes’ too, including in an email to parents as recent as March 22, 2023. But on March 23, 2023, the School Board flipped positions. Now, it claims authority to introduce pre-K and elementary school kids to certain books (the ‘Pride Storybooks’) that promote one-sided transgender ideology, encourage gender transitioning, and focus excessively on romantic infatuation with no parental notification or opportunity to opt out.”

The plaintiffs further alleged, “Parents have kids in the Montgomery County Public Schools (‘MCPS’). They come from many faith backgrounds, including diverse strands of Islam and Christianity. Their concerns reflect those of thousands of other Montgomery County parents from a variety of faiths and political persuasions.”

The plaintiffs also alleged, “They are united in the conviction that the Pride Storybooks are age-inappropriate and inconsistent with their religious beliefs and practices and their child-raising philosophies.”

Plaintiffs then alleged that “one book invites three- and four-year-olds to look for images of things they might find at a pride parade, including an ‘intersex flag,’ a ‘drag king’ and ‘drag queen,’ ‘leather,’ ‘underwear,’ and an image of a celebrated LGBTQ activist and sex worker, ‘Marsha P. Johnson.’”

Additionally, the plaintiffs alleged, “Another book, for fifth graders, advocates a child-knows-best approach to gender transitioning, telling students that a decision to transition doesn’t have to ‘make sense’ and that students are the best ‘teacher’ on such matters, not parents or other adults.”

Further, the plaintiffs alleged, “This school year, after the Parents were told about the books, requests for their kids to opt out were honored. Now the Parents have been told that, next year, no notice will be given and no opt-outs tolerated because their kids must learn to be more ‘LGBTQ-Inclusive.’”

The plaintiffs then alleged, “The School Board’s recent about-face strips away this long-standing protection of parental rights. This violates not just Maryland law and Board policy and practice but also the United States Constitution.”

Plaintiffs presented six claims for relief, including for alleged violation of First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and Maryland State Law.

In the prayer for relief, the plaintiffs requested a judgment granting declaratory and injunctive relief. The plaintiffs also requested an award for nominal and actual damages. 

This is a summary of a legal complaint. All statements, claims, and allegations listed herein reflect the position of the plaintiff only and do not represent the position of UniCourt. Additionally, this case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the current status of this case. To view the latest case updates and court documents, please sign up for a UniCourt account.