A coalition of Oklahoma parents, teachers, clergy, and students has filed a lawsuit against State Superintendent Ryan Walters challenging the 2025 Social Studies Standards he adopted earlier this year.
The plaintiffs are accusing Walters of unlawfully inserting religious doctrine into the curriculum while pushing partisan political narratives. This lawsuit is a part of the broader debate over government-run schools being used to inculcate young students with political propaganda and progressive ideas on sexuality and gender identity.
It appears the group is using the same tactic that folks on the right have used to challenge progressive efforts to use educational institutions to influence young minds into embracing progressivism.
The plaintiffs contend that the Oklahoma State Board of Education violated the Open Meeting Act when it approved the new social studies standards. They state that the agency did not disclose the altered standards to the public or to most of the board members. Instead, the agenda for the February 27, 2025, meeting only noted that the Board would consider “the proposed Oklahoma Academic Standards for Science and Social Studies.”
It was only after the vote that it was revealed that the Board had approved the alterations. Van Dehende, one of the Board members, acknowledged that “the changes [to the standards] were not known to the public” and noted that “several board members voted on something they did not know had been changed.”
The lawsuit further alleges that the new standards require students to learn specific religious stories portrayed as historical fact. One provision requires second graders to “[i]dentify stories from Christianity that influenced the American Founders and culture, including the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth (e.g., the ‘Golden Rule,’ the Sermon on the Mount).”
Another standard requires first graders to “[i]dentify stories about people and ideas from Judaism that influenced the American colonists, the Founders, and American culture (e.g., David and Goliath, Moses and the Ten Commandments).”
The clergy members who are part of the lawsuit argued that the standards promote “one version of Christianity over other Christian belliefs” and “misuse[s] the Bible and Christianity in a manner that his deeply harmful to religious freedom and public education.”
The complaint further alleges that the 2025 standards have a clear political agenda. They mandate that educators instruct students on the debate over the 2020 election and COVID-19 pandemic. Students would be required to “[i]dentify discrepancies in 2020 elections results by looking at graphs and other information,” including ballot-counting issues.
Another standard instructs educators to teach that the “source of the COVID-19 pandemic [is] from a Chinese lab,” even though the scientific consensus is that the coronavirus came from animal-to-human transmission. However, this argument was debunked when the government finally admitted the virus originated in a Chinese lab.
The plaintiffs contend that the new standards have caused students, parents, and teachers emotional, educational, and spiritual harm. Non-Christian families claim their children will feel “ostracized and marginalized” because they will be required to study religious doctrine. Christian parents argue that they present “theological doctrines that are contrary to those children’s beliefs.”
This lawsuit is part of a larger effort to combat supposed efforts to infuse Christian religious values into the classroom. A group called “We’re Oklahoma Education” (WOKE) began encouraging parents to opt their children out of lessons they perceive as religious instruction. The organization provides “opt out” forms to these parents, similar to how Christian parents can opt their children out of lessons involving sexuality or gender identity.
This case will likely hinge on the actual content in the curriculum. It is accurate to teach that Christian values played a prominent role in American history. Many of the moral ideas that underpin the nation are contained in the Bible. There is a distinct difference between referring to how Christianity shaped American society and sermonizing in the classroom. The issue will be whether the new curriculum actually crosses that line or whether the plaintiffs are simply trying to obfuscate this part of American history.
However, this story is reflective of the overall debate over education. Progressives have been hellbent on using schools to turn out a generation of people who embrace their ideology. On the other side, some don’t want what they perceive as right-wing indoctrination in classrooms either.
This is another issue that makes a case for school choice. The only way for parents to ensure their children’s schools are not pushing values with which they disagree is to give them the ultimate power to decide where and how their children are educated. If parents want their kids learning woke nonsense, that should be their prerogative. However, they should not be able to force that ideology on other people’s children.
If more parents had the option to send their children to their preferred school, then these debates would not be as prevalent. Free market principles will ultimately decide what schools are teaching students without using government to enforce it.