Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asks absurd question during arguments over LGBTQ books in public school libraries

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was lambasted by critics online for a strange question she asked during arguments over parents rejecting controversial books in public schools.

The lawsuit accused the Montgomery County Board of Education in Maryland of violating the religious rights of parents with students in the school district. They objected to books that included transgender and gay characters being taught to their children.

‘I’m struggling to see how it burdens a parent’s religious exercise if the school teaches something that the parents disagrees with.’

The parents, which included Muslim and Christian Orthodox adherents, asked for an opt-out for their children from any exposure to the left-wing content, but they were denied by the district.

Attorneys for the parents argued that the school district was “compelling instruction designed to indoctrinate petitioners’ children against their religious beliefs.”

While most court watchers agreed that the court appeared to be sympathetic to the parents’ demands, one liberal justice appeared to be critical of the argument in favor of parental rights. Jackson simply said that parents had the option to pull their children out of school if they didn’t like the curriculum.

“I guess I’m struggling to see how it burdens a parent’s religious exercise if the school teaches something that the parent disagrees with,” she added. “You have a choice. You don’t have to send your kid to that school. You can put them in another situation. You can homeschool them. How is it a burden on the parent if they have the option to send their kid elsewhere?”

Video of her comments went viral on social media, where many disagreed with the position.

“You’re forced through your tax dollars to fund education you fundamentally disagree with for everyone else’s children and now incur the costs of educating your children on top of that instead of being granted a quite simple accommodation. Wow. Just wow,” read one popular post.

“I shouldn’t have to invoke a religious exemption for simply wanting to protect my child’s innocence while they’re still in preschool or grade school,” said another user.

“I’m sure she did NOT mean for the Parents to put their kids in ‘another situation’ and stop paying their school taxes,” said another.

Other snippets from the hearing led many to suspect that the court would rule on the side of parents asking for an opt-out.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett opined that the books didn’t merely assert the existence of LGBTQ people but included advocacy on the part of the LGBTQ agenda.

“It’s not just exposure to the idea, right?” she said. “It’s saying this is the right view of the world. This is how we think about things. This is how you should think about things. This is like 2 plus 2 is 4.”

The ruling is due by the end of June.