The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that Maryland parents who have religious objections can pull their children from public school lessons using LGBTQ storybooks.

The justices reversed lower-court rulings in favor of the Montgomery County school system in suburban Washington. The high court ruled that the schools likely could not require elementary school children to sit through lessons involving the books if parents expressed religious objections to the material.

The decision was not a final ruling in the case, but the justices strongly suggested that the parents will win in the end.

The court ruled that policies like the one at issue in the case are subjected to the strictest level of review, nearly always dooming them.

Democratic officials in Maryland and Montgomery County were quick to express their disappointment, while conservatives celebrated the ruling.

Montgomery County Council Member Evan Glass, who is the legislative body’s first and only openly LGBTQIA+ member, called the ruling a “painful setback.”

“Representation in education is not about politics, it’s about dignity. It’s about telling a child with two moms that their family matters. It’s about letting a trans teen know they are not alone. It’s about ensuring that every student knows they belong,” Glass said in a statement.

His colleague, Council President Kate Stewart, said the ruling “undermines the hard work that Montgomery County and counties across the nation have taken to promote a culture of respect and inclusivity, where everyone is seen and valued as their true and authentic selves.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, who represents most of Montgomery County, called the ruling “of the most dubious constitutional reasoning.”

“There are religions that oppose medical science, surgery, psychiatry, interracial marriage, monogamy, woman’s suffrage, the right of gay people to marry, and so on,” he said in a statement. “All of them will now be able to flood the courts with claims that particular curricular teachings and books offend their sincere values and their children should not be exposed to the offensive doctrines.”

In a statement, House Minority Leader Jason Buckel, an Allegany County Republican, said the decision “strikes a balance between the rights of parents to act in accordance with their religious beliefs while still allowing public schools to reflect their greater community.”

And Senate Minority Whip Justin Ready called parents “the most important voice at the table” and said the case “should serve as a wake-up call to education officials across Maryland.”

The Maryland Freedom Caucus applauded the ruling as a “clear rebuke” of what it called a “growing trend of government overreach into family life.”

And Rep. Andy Harris, the only Republican in Maryland’s Congressional delegation, called the ruling “a victory for parental rights and religious freedom across the country.”

The school district introduced the storybooks, including “Prince & Knight” and “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” in 2022 as part of an effort to better reflect the district’s diversity. In “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” a niece worries that her uncle won’t have as much time for her after he gets married to another man.

The justices have repeatedly endorsed claims of religious discrimination in recent years and the case is among several religious-rights cases at the court this term. The decision also comes amid increases in recent years in books being banned from public school and public libraries.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland said the ruling could have “far-reaching consequences for public schools’ ability to create an inclusive and welcoming environment” and for the ability to “implement any secular lesson plan that may trigger religious objections.”

“This decision could wreak havoc on public schools, tying their hands on basic curricular decisions and undermining their ability to prepare students to live in our pluralistic society,” said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU’s Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief.

The president of the Montgomery County Education Association David Stein, said the court’s ruling could disrupt classrooms.

“The Court heedlessly dismissed the impact that this will have on how educators actually manage their classrooms,” Stein said in a statement. Who will be responsible for the students when they are opted out of classrooms and content? Who will take on this additional work?”

Many of the removals were organized by Moms for Liberty and other conservative organizations that advocate for more parental input over what books are available to students. Soon after President Donald Trump, a Republican, took office in January, the Education Department called the book bans a “hoax” and dismissed 11 complaints that had been filed under Trump’s predecessor, President Joe Biden, a Democrat.

The writers’ group Pen America said in a court filing in the Maryland case that the objecting parents wanted “a constitutionally suspect book ban by another name.” Pen America reported more than 10,000 books were banned in the last school year.

Parents initially had been allowed to opt their children out of the lessons for religious and other reasons, but the school board reversed course a year later, prompting protests and eventually a lawsuit.

At arguments in April, a lawyer for the school district told the justices that the “opt outs” had become disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction in Montgomery schools that students can be excused from, lawyer Alan Schoenfeld said.

The case hit unusually close to home, as three justices live in the county, though they didn’t send their children to public schools.

Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown, like other Democratic officials in the state, released a statement expressing his disappointment with the ruling.

The books in question “help teachers create classrooms where all students can thrive and feel safe, regardless of their gender identity or sexual orientation,” Brown said.

This story may be updated.

Mark Sherman of the Associated Press contributed to this report.