The United States Supreme Court just handed the left the most spectacular, jaw-dropping, completely saw it coming but still couldn’t stop it defeat of 2026.
6 to3 guys.
And the Montgomery County School Board, you know, the absolute masterminds who decided that American parents didn’t deserve to know what was being read to their kindergarteners, just found out the hard way that the nine justices that are sitting in the highest court in the land do not in fact care about their administrative convenience.
They just don’t.
So now here’s the part that has justices Katanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, and even Elina Kagan staring at the ceiling this morning wondering where it all went wrong.
You see, they actually thought that they’re going to win this one.
They argued in writing with their names attached for the entire country to read forever in the historical record that if you don’t like what the school board is quietly doing to your 5-year-old, you should simply find a different school.
That was the legal reasoning from a lifetime appointed Supreme Court justice collecting a federal salary.
I mean, I literally could not invent that level of outofouch thinking if I had a team of writers and a month to try.
Now, here is the truly beautiful part here.
This ruling is just the opening act.
In fact, the Supreme Court still has bombshells sitting in the chamber on birthright citizenship and even mail-in ballot deadlines, and the left is walking straight toward them with absolutely no idea what’s coming.
We have everything that the mainstream media quietly buried on page 12.
It’s all right here, guys.
And we’re not going to skip a single word of it.
So, do yourself a favor right now.
Hit the subscribe button before this video is over because we do this every single day and you genuinely cannot afford to miss what we’re dropping next.
Oh, and hey guys, if you enjoy what you see today, leave me a like on the way out.
Totally appreciate it.
It only takes 2 seconds and it tells the YouTube algorithm that common sense is still alive here in America.
Also, if you or someone you love needs free Medicare help, our friends at Chapter are absolutely amazing, guys.
They have got you covered completely.
Click the link in the description down below or call the phone number at the bottom of your screen right here.
These guys are free.
The help is free.
They’re real people, actual answers.
And uh let’s let’s get into this.
Oh, and by the way, the average senior saves about $1,100 a year.
Anyway, let’s go ahead and get started, guys, because parents, your day just finally arrived.
So, stop everything.
I don’t care what you’re doing.
I don’t care if you’re making dinner right now.
I don’t care if you’re folding laundry.
Put it all down.
You got to pay attention to this, okay? Because what just happened in Washington DC this morning? This is the kind of thing that makes you want to call your mom, your neighbor, your cousin who never pays attention to the news and say, “Are you guys seeing this?” That’s right.
The United States Supreme Court just ruled 6 to3 in favor of American parents.
6 to3.
Not a participation trophy, not a we’ll lick into it, a ruling, a real one with teeth.
Now, here’s the beautiful part.
The left just didn’t see it coming.
Or maybe they did and they just couldn’t stop it.
Either way, you know, the the look on their faces right now, absolutely priceless.
So, here’s the setup, right? So, a group of parents, different religions, different zip codes, different pretty much everything.
Okay? They united around one crazy radical idea that maybe, just maybe, they should know what their kindergartenner is being taught.
I know it’s a wild concept.
Apparently required nine Supreme Court justices to confirm.
Now, let me go ahead and break this down in language that is so simple even a school board administrator could understand it.
Okay, so Justice Samuel Alo wrote the majority opinion.
Now, here’s here’s the entire legal summary in about two sentences.
Okay, schools must tell parents when classroom materials conflict with their religious beliefs and parents can pull their child out of that lesson.
That’s it, guys.
That’s the whole thing.
It’s almost as simple as the Save America Act.
Now, I I know what you’re thinking, guys.
You’re probably thinking, “Wait a second.
That’s just called being a decent human being.
” I I know.
I I know that you’re absolutely right.
I mean, we apparently needed a constitutional showdown all the way to the highest court in the land to establish that basic human decency is in fact legal.
Yeah.
Here ye here.
Yeah.
We had to do all that just to prove that.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to 2026.
Joining us now, education activist, the wife of Florida Congressman and gubanatorial candidate Byron Donald’s, mother of three, Erica Donald’s.
Erica, we’re so excited to talk to you.
Thanks for joining us.
What do you make of this case? Well, this case is so important to uphold, as you said, the rights of parents to direct the upbringing of their children.
Whether that is religious, moral, character building, academic, we believe that parents must be in the driver’s seat.
They have to be decision makers.
And in this particular case, there was an opt out, but so many parents opted out of this controversial curriculum which was being given to prek through sixth graders with radical gender ideology.
It was disruptive to the school day.
But instead of addressing the controversial curriculum and respecting parents rights, McGomery County decided to take the opt out away completely and fight it all the way to the Supreme Court.
Well, that’s something because you know, even gay people say this is wrong.
Lawmakers say parents have every right to protect their 5-year-old children from lessons in sexuality.
I mean, Congressman Wesley Hunt says the left is prioritizing gender ideology over reading, math, and science.
Even a New York Times columnist Megan Megan Stack, who wrote from her home in M in Montgomery County, she said what schools are doing is wrong.
She says this is not about banning books.
It’s about protecting children and an opt out.
That’s what this is about.
And really, we should address that these are not age appropriate books.
And why are they being embedded into the English curriculum instead of a specifically sexual uh content curriculum that parents can opt out of? There is an ideological bent here that the the school district is allowing through public tax dollars.
Let’s remember, but this is why parents are opting out in a different way and plummeting uh district enrollments across the country.
55% according to Gallup are dissatisfied with the American public school system.
Parents are losing faith in the ability to trust the public school system to uphold their values and respect their religious liberties.
What do you make of critics saying any school board member fighting to show books with sexual content to 5-year-olds? They shouldn’t be allowed to be around 5-year-olds.
It is a major concern for parents around the country and it has driven the moms for liberty, the parents rights movement.
This growing concern among parents that their rights are continuously being violated, not being respected and that’s why school choice is also a very popular policy that is growing by leaps and bounds across the country.
Parents want the ability not just to opt out of radical ideological curriculum like we’ve seen in this case, but to opt out completely out of the public school system that refuses to respect them as the primary decision makers for their children.
Erica Donald, you were terrific on this.
We would love it if you could come back on our show.
It’s great to have you on.
Activists, children’s activists, Byron Donald’s wife, Erica Donald, the congressman’s wife, was great there.
Thank you so much.
So, Justice Alo didn’t mince words.
He said, “Without this protection, parents face an impossible choice.
Watch your child get exposed to material that completely violates your own faith or drain your bank account to pay for private school.
” Yeah, I know.
It’s some choice, isn’t it? It’s kind of like telling somebody, “You can have the sandwich, but first, give us your wallet.
” So, let’s talk, guys.
Let’s talk about the villain in this story here.
We got to talk about him.
Okay.
Montgomery County, Maryland.
This is a school board that looked at a long list of parents opting their children out of a a certain uh list of reading materials and they thought, you know what the problem is here? Too much communication.
So, they eliminated the opt out entirely.
Now, I want you to really absorb that decision-making process just for a moment.
Okay? So, parents said, “This does not work for our family.
” And the board’s genius solution was, “Stop telling them that it’s happening.
” And so, this is the magic trick.
Now, you see the book, now you don’t.
Now, your 5-year-old saw the book.
Surprise.
Yeah, exactly.
These parents pay property taxes, right? And guess what’s in those property taxes? A big old chunk of those property taxes go to school taxes, income taxes.
They were literally signing the checks that keep those school board members employed.
And in return, the school board decided that those same parents didn’t deserve a heads up about what was being read to their children at 9:00 in the morning on a Tuesday.
Bold strategy, guys.
Sure didn’t work out that great, did it? Now, real quick, guys, if this ruling matters to you, text this video to one parent right now.
Just one.
They need to hear this today.
Go ahead.
I’ll wait.
I I I’ll twiddle my thumbs here.
You know, I’ll just wait patiently.
I got more.
I got more to share with you guys.
All right.
So, now let’s get uncomfortably specific here because vague outrage just doesn’t cut it anymore.
I mean, we need we need we need to turn it up a notch.
So, we’re not talking about high school seniors reading challenging literature or literature.
We are talking about kindergarten, 5-year-olds, children who still argue about whether a hot dog is a sandwich, books like Pride Puppy, books like The Prince and the Night, a romantic story between two male characters being read aloud in elementary school classrooms without so much of a without so much as a a a phone call home first.
Now, I don’t know about you, but I am not okay with that.
Now, let me be absolutely crystal clear.
Nobody is saying burn the books.
Nobody is saying that these books can’t exist.
That they exist.
That’s cool.
But don’t be reading that stuff to my kids.
Okay.
Now, there is a galaxy size difference between a book existing in the world and a public school employee reading it to your 5-year-old essentially grooming them while you’re at work completely unaware.
I mean, am I off base here? If I am, somebody call me out.
Please call me out.
I’m good with that.
And when parents found out and started opting out in large numbers, did the did the school board think, “Wow, maybe we should communicate better or hey, maybe there’s a problem with something in our curriculum that parents are opting out.
” No, they thought, “Let’s just go ahead and stop communicating altogether.
” Public education, everybody.
Okay, give it a hand.
Let’s let’s give it a golf clap here.
Okay, this is public education for you.
Okay, now I need you to hold your beverage firmly before we go into this, okay? because this next part gets a little slippery.
So during Supreme Court arguments, Justice Katanji Brown Jackson was presented with the burden that this curriculum places on religious parents, parents, you know, obviously parents of faith, but parents who simply just want to know what’s happening in their child’s classroom, right? I think it’s understandable.
Her answer absolutely delivered from a leather chair in the most powerful courtroom in America was essentially this.
Go to a different school.
Now, I’m going to give you a moment with that, guys.
Okay, so your school is teaching all kinds of things that violate your religion and the Supreme Court Justice Katanji Brown says, “Oh, just go to another school.
Just just go to the private school up a street that’s like $40,000 a year.
” Yeah.
For your 5-year-old.
So, a Supreme Court justice, a lifetime appointment, the the the whole robe, the whole gavvel, the whole thing.
And her legal reasoning for why parents have no legitimate grievance was, “Have you considered leaving?” Wow.
It’s the judicial equivalent of a restaurant manager saying, “Well, if you don’t like our food, just go eat somewhere else.
” After you’ve already paid, sat down, and they’ve served your child something you explicitly did not order.
Justice Alo and five colleagues essentially had to say out loud, “Ma’am, this is not how any of this works.
” Anybody remember that commercial, “That’s not how this works.
That’s not how any of this works.
” And they were right, guys.
They were absolutely right.
So, let’s be honest about the three dissenting judges, okay? Jackson, Sodtomayor, and Kagan actually putting it in writing because they did actually put it in writing.
It’s public record.
Go ahead and read it.
So, Justice Sotomayor’s descent argues that exposing children to diverse ideas and viewpoints is the whole point of public education.
It’s the whole point according to them, right? That that this ruling threatens the essence of public education.
Now, I don’t know what she is smoking.
Now, surface level, this almost sounds like a reasonable philosophy.
Okay, sure.
Up until you translate it from the Supreme Court language into regular English.
So, what she’s actually saying is that the school’s right to expose your child to whatever they choose without telling you outweighs your right as a parent to even be informed about what’s happening.
So, not your right to ban anything, not your right to protest in the streets, just your right to get a note home.
They voted against notes going home to the parents.
Three Supreme Court justices, lifetime appointments, federal salaries, the full prestige of the American legal system.
Just voted against notes going home.
Six disagreed with them.
The score is 6 to3.
Parents win.
The Supreme Court is taking up a case over certain types of books in elementary schools.
It all stems from a group of parents in Maryland.
They want to be able to opt their children out of lessons that involve books with themes of gender and sexuality.
The reason they say is that it goes against their religion.
NBC News White House correspondent Yamish Alindor joins us now with this reporting.
Yamich, I know you’ve been following this case from the start.
Walk us through what’s expected to happen tomorrow.
Well, tomorrow the Supreme Court will he oral arguments in a case about whether Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland is violating the Constitution by not allowing parents to opt their children out of a policy that requires teachers to read students at least one book a year focused on LGBTQ plus teen themes and diversity.
I travel to the community to see what this is at the heart of this case.
And again, oral arguments are going to be tomorrow.
Take a listen.
In the largest school district in Maryland, a dispute over books, gender, and religion is pitting families against each other in a case now coming before the Supreme Court.
At issue, a policy by McGomery County Public Schools that does not allow parents to opt their children out of lessons that use these books and feature LGBTQ plus themes, including same-sex love stories and transgender characters.
In 2023, a group of parents who are Muslim, Catholic, and Ukrainian Orthodox filed a lawsuit saying the school policy violates their First Amendment rights to freedom of religion, but the policy has been upheld by lower court.
The case is bringing a heated national debate to this community.
The Islamic faith and numerous other faiths, we believe that that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Whale Elasheri, a Muslim parent, has pulled his 9-year-old daughter out of the school system and is now homeschooling her.
He is not part of the lawsuit, but has been organizing protests against the policy.
I’m responsible for my child, and I want the accommodations to make sure that that child is raised in an ecosystem that I believe does not contradict my religious beliefs.
Jeffrey Gans and his husband Dennis Williams support the school’s policy.
You may not agree with homosexuality, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
So by removing a child from the classroom, it’s sending a totally negative [snorts] message to that other child in that classroom who might be struggling with their identity.
If I could have had a book like that when I was young, it would made all the difference in the world.
El Kasher says he doesn’t want the school system to change its curriculum just to allow him to opt out.
Though he thinks some of the books are not age appropriate for students, children at a young age are very impressionable.
Eric Baxter, a lawyer for the parents suing, plans to argue the case before the high court.
The Supreme Court has long said that schools aren’t there to impose one ideological view, that we learn to get along by by respecting each other’s views, and that’s all we’re asking for here.
Montgomery County Public Schools did not respond to our multiple requests for comment, but in court documents, the school district said teachers are not permitted to enforce a particular viewpoint or ask students to change how they feel.
If we allow kids to opt out of this curriculum, of these books, where does that where do we draw the line? Do we opt out of teaching about religion to my children because I don’t want them to learn about a religion different than mine? Now, the 63 conservative majority Supreme Court will have the final say.
Wow, Yamish, great report.
How do people on both sides of this issue feel about what the court may decide? Well, it’s a good question.
We know the school district has won in lower court, so they’re hoping to win again at the high court.
That said, the parents and lawyers against the school district’s policy told me they feel very confident that they will win this case, especially after President Trump successfully ran for reelection in part by pushing back against teaching about LGBTQ plus themes and transgender Americans.
And this is, of course, a 6-3 conservative majority court that experts say is more likely to side with parents saying their religious rights are being violated.
So now, here’s my favorite analogy here, guys.
This is my favorite analogy and I’m going to need you to follow with me.
Follow me on this one.
Okay? So, imagine you walk into a restaurant, right? You sit down, you you hand them your credit card before you even look at the menu, because that’s just how this particular restaurant works.
You have no choice.
Every month, they charge you whether you show up or not.
Now, I know this restaurant definitely sounds like it sucks to you, doesn’t it? Cuz it sounds like it sucks to me, too.
Now, imagine imagine the waiter comes out, puts a plate in front of your child, and when you ask what’s on it, he says, “That’s not really your business.
” Wow.
Now, that’s the waiter telling you about what’s on your kid’s plate.
They’re telling you it’s none of your business.
This is the relationship between American taxpayers and their public school system as the Montgomery County School Board has defined it.
You fund it, you staff it, you literally make it exist, and somehow you lost the right to know what’s on the menu.
Now, multiple parents this week said it best.
As long as they’re paying property taxes into this system, that alone gives us the right.
They’re not wrong.
They never were wrong.
In fact, the Supreme Court just made it official.
Now, here’s the part that the mainstream media will absolutely not put in their headlines, so I will.
In Oregon, this great state in the union, parents who showed up to public school board meetings to ask questions about curriculum were classified as domestic terrorists.
Domestic terrorists.
Okay, the same category as people who blow stuff up.
The same label applied to parents at a school board meeting with a microphone and a 3minut speaking limit.
Unbelievable.
Now, picture that scene, guys.
A mom, cardigan, notebook, raised hand, labeled somehow as a national security threat because she asked about a book her six-year-old brought home.
Unbelievable.
I mean, you genuinely cannot make this stuff up.
And the terrifying part here, nobody had to.
It actually happened.
Nobody had to make none of this stuff up.
This is literally the environment that American parents have been navigating.
That’s the ground that these families were standing on while they walked into that courtroom.
Now, today’s ruling, today’s ruling doesn’t erase all of it, but it does it does something important.
I will say that it says that those parents were right the whole time.
They were right.
All right, guys.
Now, don’t change the channel because the Supreme Court is not finished dropping things on the left’s agenda.
So, the current session wraps up in just a few weeks.
Still on the docket, birthright citizenship, right? So, President Trump signed an executive order on day one, January 2025, ending automatic citizenship for children born on US soil to parents who are here illegally.
So, the courts immediately went to battle stations.
It’s been fighting its way upward ever since.
And so now, the betting markets currently give this about a 6% chance of surviving.
6%.
I know, I know the glass half empty crowd is already writing the eulogy, but let me offer a different perspective here.
Okay, so the Supreme Court just ruled 6 to3 in favor of something that the establishment said parents would never win.
Nobody thought that that was coming either.
6% in a country of 330 million people who just watched the Supreme Court remind everyone that long shots land sometimes.
So just keep praying on this one, guys.
Seriously.
Now, here’s the one that might genuinely be the biggest ruling of the entire summer.
And somehow it’s getting less attention than it deserves.
The Supreme Court is potentially what, weeks away from issuing a federal ruling on mail-in ballot counting deadlines? Specifically, can states count ballots that arrive after election day? Meanwhile, in California right now, today, they are still counting ballots from the gubanatorial race and the Los Angeles mayoral race days after voting ended, finding fresh batches all trending the same direction.
Shocking.
Truly shocking, guys.
I mean, nobody could have predicted that.
Uh, the betting markets on this ruling sit at roughly 73% in favor of a ban on postelection day counting, 73%.
So, what does that mean practically? Polls close, counting happens, midnight done.
No more we found another truckload of ballots at 3:00 in the morning press conferences.
Okay, you vote on election day, not election week, not election month.
Revolutionary concept, I know.
Apparently also needs a Supreme Court ruling to confirm.
Now, let’s look at the scoreboard here, okay? Because nobody in the mainstream media will put this on the screen, so we will.
So, in the lower federal courts, President Trump’s legal team wins roughly 35% of cases.
35, which means activist judges at the district level are rejecting the America First agenda almost twice for every time they allow it through.
Now, that sounds bad, right? Now, here’s the rest of the story.
At the Supreme Court, President Trump’s win rate is approximately 95%.
95.
So, what’s actually happening in those lower courts? It’s not law.
It’s a stall tactic.
It’s running up legal bills left and right.
It’s burning time and energy and resources, hoping something changes before the case reaches the people who actually read the Constitution.
The fancy term is lawfare.
The honest term is judges in robes doing politics instead of law.
But here’s the problem with that strategy.
Sure, you can delay things.
You cannot delay them forever.
Not with a 95% Supreme Court record sitting there waiting at the end of every appeal.
Math, it’s relentless, isn’t it? So today, guys, six Supreme Court justices just looked at the parents of this country and said something radical, something dangerous, something the Montgomery County school board apparently never saw coming.
They said, “You matter.
Your faith matters.
Your child matters.
And your right to get a note home about what’s being read in second period, that matters, too.
” Three judges disagreed.
They wrote it down, signed their names to it, and now the whole country knows exactly where they stand.
The next few weeks, they’re going to be very loud.
Birthright citizenship, mail-in ballots, more rulings, more emergency press conferences, more legal analysts on television explaining why your parental instincts are somehow unconstitutional.
Don’t flinch, guys, because here’s what no court ruling, no school board policy, and no Supreme Court descent can ever actually change.
You are the parent.
You drop that child off every morning.
You are there every night.
That is not a legal position.
That is a fact of life.
They spent years trying to work around it.
Today they just lost.
Share this video.
Trust me.
Somebody needs to hear it.
