Mirabelli v. Bonta · ¶39

In any event, there is something else: This case presents some thorny legal issues. The Court grants relief to parents on the same two substantive grounds that supported the District Court's injunction. First, the Court says, some parents can show that the State's policy “substantially inter- fere[s]” with their First Amendment right “to guide the religious development of their children.” Ante, at 496. Here, the Court analogizes to Mahmoud v. Taylor, 606 U. S. 522 (2025), a decision issued last Term about school curriculum. The ink on that decision is barely dry, and courts have just begun to consider its meaning and reach. But even assume the Court is right on the free exercise score; still, that could not justify extending relief to all the parents here. After all, some of those parents object to the State's policy not for religious reasons, but simply because it prevents them from…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.