Shea
@sheabaumgarner.bsky.social
gen z | 3L | L. Rev. Symp. Ed.
a group of youth rights scholars put together a brief on the issue of youth rights for this case. it can be found here:
www.supremecourt.gov
April 22, 2025 at 1:56 PM
a group of youth rights scholars put together a brief on the issue of youth rights for this case. it can be found here:
with the focus on parents’religious rights, mahmoud v. taylor requires
that to rule for the parents, the court must surrender its constitutional authority to interpretation of youth rights rights to parents on the basis that yoder forbids kids from having independent thoughts from their parents.
that to rule for the parents, the court must surrender its constitutional authority to interpretation of youth rights rights to parents on the basis that yoder forbids kids from having independent thoughts from their parents.
April 22, 2025 at 1:56 PM
with the focus on parents’religious rights, mahmoud v. taylor requires
that to rule for the parents, the court must surrender its constitutional authority to interpretation of youth rights rights to parents on the basis that yoder forbids kids from having independent thoughts from their parents.
that to rule for the parents, the court must surrender its constitutional authority to interpretation of youth rights rights to parents on the basis that yoder forbids kids from having independent thoughts from their parents.
people under 18 have long had various first amendment rights. and the use of this quote by the parents to bolster their yoder argument is ignorant to those rights as well as disrespectful of the ability of youth to think freely and critically.
April 22, 2025 at 1:56 PM
people under 18 have long had various first amendment rights. and the use of this quote by the parents to bolster their yoder argument is ignorant to those rights as well as disrespectful of the ability of youth to think freely and critically.
the parents quote the school board saying, “’Any child . . . . may come away from [] instruction’ with ‘a new perspective not easily
contravened by their parents.’”
while this quote is unfortunately a legal blunder for the school board, the manner in which the parents use it ought to be as well.
contravened by their parents.’”
while this quote is unfortunately a legal blunder for the school board, the manner in which the parents use it ought to be as well.
April 22, 2025 at 1:56 PM
the parents quote the school board saying, “’Any child . . . . may come away from [] instruction’ with ‘a new perspective not easily
contravened by their parents.’”
while this quote is unfortunately a legal blunder for the school board, the manner in which the parents use it ought to be as well.
contravened by their parents.’”
while this quote is unfortunately a legal blunder for the school board, the manner in which the parents use it ought to be as well.
the focus remains on the parents, because they believe that Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) (the case that allows the amish to remove their children from school after a certain point) does not permit schools to read kids queer books without notice.
April 22, 2025 at 1:56 PM
the focus remains on the parents, because they believe that Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) (the case that allows the amish to remove their children from school after a certain point) does not permit schools to read kids queer books without notice.
a main issue with this case is that it focuses on the religious rights of parents. but in the end, the individuals most affected are going to be public school students.
April 22, 2025 at 1:56 PM
a main issue with this case is that it focuses on the religious rights of parents. but in the end, the individuals most affected are going to be public school students.