Judge denies MD graduation bid over gender curriculum dispute

Listen to this article

A Montgomery County high schooler was not allowed to graduate last week because he didn’t take the required health class due to his father’s objection to content related to gender identity and sexual orientation.

A Maryland federal judge last week sided with Montgomery County Public Schools in a lawsuit filed by Seth Gottesman of Gaithersburg, whose son attended Damascus High School.

After being denied a religious exemption, Gottesman sued in Montgomery County Circuit Court in mid-May and asked for a temporary restraining order that would allow his son to graduate on May 30.

MCPS removed the case to federal court, and on May 29, U.S. District Judge Deborah Chasanow denied the motion in a one-page order that did not explain her reasoning.

The lawsuit came about three weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in another case in which anti-LGBTQ parents sought to opt their kids out of parts of school curricula. In the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor, a large group of parents of various faiths argued the First Amendment should allow them to opt their elementary school-age kids from lessons involving LGBTQ+ themes; one book cited is about a girl who attends her uncle’s wedding to another man.

“In the Health course, MCPS teaches minors that non-traditional sexuality, non-traditional family units, and transgenderism are as natural and beneficial as heterosexuality, traditional family structures, and acceptance of one’s biological sex,” states Gottesman’s motion for a temporary restraining order.

“At the same time, Maryland law recognizes that many parents disagree with this worldview and find such teaching objectionable for their children for religious, health, and other reasons.”

The defendants in the case are MCPS, the county Board of Education, Superintendent Thomas Taylor, Damascus High School Principal Bradley Rohner and MCPS Office of School Support and Improvement Director Yolanda Allen.

It’s not publicly known what MCPS argued in response to the motion for a temporary restraining order. Its opposition was filed under seal in order to protect the student’s confidentiality, court records show. A spokesperson for MCPS declined to comment. Gottesman’s lawyer, Paul Rivera, did not answer a call and an email Monday afternoon.

According to the complaint, Gottesman began asking Damascus High School and MCPS officials about the health curriculum during the second semester of his son’s freshman year, in March 2022.

Gottesman alleges that MCPS failed to inform him of its decision to deny his religious exemption from the health-class requirement for a year and a half. In February 2023, he filed an administrative complaint seeking an exemption, then had a meeting with an MCPS official the next month. He followed up a few weeks later, having not heard back.

“Plaintiff communicated his interpretation and understanding that in light of MCPS’ failure to decide his (complaint), that his religious exemption had been effectively approved,” the motion states.

He finally heard back in September 2024, when MCPS claimed that it had denied his request in March 2023. Gottesman argues this was back-dated, and he never received it at the time.

“Plaintiff defies MCPS to produce an authentic email with a date/time stamp and email header metadata proving that Exhibit 10 was emailed to him on 3/30/2023,” the motion states.

Gottesman corresponded with school officials, including Allen, who offered alternatives he deemed “objectionable.” It was too late to appeal the denial.

The required health class includes sections on mental and emotional health, substance abuse prevention, family life and human sexuality, safety and violence prevention, healthy eating and disease prevention and control.

The motion for a temporary restraining order cites a Maryland State Department of Education regulation allowing religious exemptions from the section on human sexuality “upon written request from the parent or guardian.”

The lawsuit claims that information on gender identity and sexual orientation are spread throughout the curriculum, not confined to the “family life and human sexuality” section. Gottesman argued that meant he would have to opt his son out from the whole class, not just the section.

Because the LGBTQ+ material is spread throughout the course, he argued, the ability to opt out of one section is “meaningless and superfluous.”