PRH, The Authors Guild, and the EBMA File Amicus Brief in the Case of Mahmoud v. Taylor
Penguin Random House (PRH), The Authors Guild, and the Educational Book and Media Association (EBMA) have jointly submitted an amicus brief on April 9, 2025 to the United States Supreme Court in the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case yesterday, April 22, 2025.
The amicus brief supports the Montgomery County, Maryland school district, which is defending a challenge to its school curriculum brought by a group of parents seeking to opt their children out of classroom lessons involving children’s books about LGBTQ+ related stories, arguing that such materials violate their religious beliefs.
Among the books cited in the case are MY RAINBOW by DeShanna & Trinity Neal, illustrated by Art Twink, published by Kokila, and BORN READY: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope by Jodie Patterson, illustrated by Charnelle Pinkney Barlow, published by Crown Books for Young Readers. Both imprints are published under Penguin Random House.
In its amicus brief, the coalition emphasizes that such a ruling would chill the incentive to create books that do not conform to religious orthodoxies, narrowing the range of literature available to students. The brief also argues that that allowing parents to opt out of books based on religious objections would also restrict students’ access to diverse perspectives and experiences.
Penguin Random House Vice President and Associate General Counsel Dan Novack stated: “We are proud to publish a wide range of books reflecting many viewpoints, and we stand with our authors. We ask the Supreme Court to recognize the expertise of professional educators and allow students to see themselves and their neighbors in books.”
From Mary Rasenberger, CEO, Authors Guild: “Reading about different people doesn’t indoctrinate children any more than reading about space exploration makes a child an astronaut, or reading biographies makes them adopt the exact life choices of historical figures. These stories don’t override a child’s own beliefs – they prepare them for the reality that they’ll share classrooms, communities, and workplaces with people from all walks of life. That’s not indoctrination – it’s essential education.”
Excerpts from the brief:
“As authors and publishers, Amici seek to ensure that their works are broadly available to all students: “a book for every reader.” A rule requiring schools to accommodate the objections to some books for some readers based on religious objections raised by some parents necessarily chills the incentive to create books that do not conform to religious orthodoxies. If petitioners’ requested relief is granted, fewer students will be able to find the books that reflect their lived experiences, because books will be created in order to fit within a more narrow range so as to be found unobjectionable. The world presented to students through the storybooks they read and listen to in school will be smaller and less representative.”
“Books give other students insight into the experiences of their peers, and foster empathy, compassion, and community building. If the Storybooks that petitioners seek to avoid have one common message, it is that members of the LGBTQ community are people too, and therefore deserving of respect. One need not condone homosexuality to be a good classmate or teammate of their gay neighbors. Research shows that children from all backgrounds who are taught these important life tools not only perform better in school but lead more successful lives as adults.”
“[T]he mere inclusion of a book in a public school’s curriculum cannot be, on its face, coercive. For example, it is perfectly appropriate for a high school history teacher to assign students to read MEIN KAMPF and write a rebuttal, but not to demand a defense of it. Context matters. It also defies logic to assert that simply reading a storybook is tantamount to conversion to the author’s values. Reading THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO does not require one to become a Marxist. And, no matter the epic poet Homer’s timeless brilliance, reading The Iliad does not compel worship of Zeus. Similarly, reading the Storybooks does not compel anyone to adopt their perspectives if their personal conscience dictates otherwise. LOVE, VIOLET does not compel anyone to adopt or endorse its perspective on the intensity of friendships between young girls. And reading BORN READY does not compel adoption or endorsement of its characters’ views on gender identity.
These books remain the speech of their authors, not the government. Any theory that mistakes mere exposure to ideas with forced indoctrination is inconsistent with the First Amendment’s free speech guarantee. Anyone—including children—can read about characters and events beyond their experiences, even if they disagree with the themes or characters in the story.”
The full brief can be found here.