Supreme Court releases ruling that opens the door to ban Bibles from school

In a case involving a Muslim family in Maryland, Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the 6-3 majority that having LGBTQ books in schools places an additional burden on families that oppose LGBTQ people.

In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the court ruled that the "parents in this case are likely to succeed in their challenge to the school board's policies foreclosing the opt-out option," explained SCOTUS blog's Amy Howe.

"We have long recognized," Alito writes, "the rights of parents to direct 'the religious upbringing' of their children. And we have held that those rights are violated by government policies that substantially interfere with the religious development of children."

The School Board's "introduction of the LGBTQ-themed books and the failure to provide notice and opt-out options for parents meets that test: it does interfere with the children's religious development and imposes a burden on religious exercise," wrote Howe in her explainer.

The key piece of the ruling gives the option for anyone to object to any book in schools based on religious concerns.

The Satanic Temple, for example, could potentially have the Bible banned from schools.

The Chuch of Satan, previously mentioned, requested its name be removed because such litigation is not consistent with its beliefs.

They said in a statement to Raw Story, "We do not believe religious organizations should be involved in politics or schools. So, as a religious organization, we do not get involved with politics or schools. We aren’t hypocrites and recognize the danger of normalizing religious overreach in these situations, and aren’t interested in playing childish tit for tat games that weaken the separation of church and state. Our membership spans the political spectrum, and we are opposed to religious organizations working to ban books, regardless of their right or left-leaning. As an aside, journalists contacting us should remember to include their contact information, and perhaps consider asking for a comment prior to publishing a story making assumptions or using us as a punchline."

Read the full ruling here.