Two Nebraska families are suing state and local officials for forcing them to choose between government indoctrination and paying for their children’s education out of pocket.
The lawsuit argues Nebraska’s system is unconstitutional: parents get a free education for their kids only if they submit to public school viewpoints on gender, race, and climate — or they pay the full cost themselves.
The New Civil Liberties Alliance is representing the Jacobsen and Menter families of Lincoln, who pulled their children from Lincoln Public Schools after exposure to transgender ideology, critical race theory programming, and climate activism that turned their kids against them.
“Nebraska cannot ban parents from teaching their own children their own values—so instead it penalizes them for exercising that recognized right. But the Constitution does not tolerate that abridgement of parents’ free speech rights.”
The suit argues education is a form of government speech — schools choose teachers, curriculum, textbooks, and which ideas to emphasize. When Nebraska funds only its preferred viewpoint, parents are forced to either accept that messaging or pay to escape it.
That’s a First Amendment violation, according to the filing obtained by The Federalist.
Nebraska law makes it a Class III misdemeanor not to enroll children in some form of school. Parents face up to three months in jail and a $500 fine if they don’t comply.
But while education is legally required, only public school families get the benefits of a free education. Families choosing private schools, religious schools, or homeschooling must cover every dollar themselves.
Nebraska ranks among the worst states in the nation for parental choice. The state offers zero tax credits, scholarships, or education savings accounts that would make alternatives attainable for working families.
The Jacobsen daughter was told she must accommodate biological males in girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms at Lincoln Public Schools. If she felt uncomfortable, she was told to remove herself from those spaces, the lawsuit states.
She was also required to use false pronouns for students claiming to be the opposite gender.
The district exposed the Jacobsen children to programming that labeled some races as oppressors and others as victims based entirely on skin color, according to the suit.
The Menter family pulled two children out after the district displayed stickers endorsing alternative sexuality and transgender ideologies. A school librarian recommended books promoting transgender ideology to one of their children.
Climate change indoctrination was so effective that one Menter child became hostile toward her own parents, demanding they reduce driving because the school taught her carbon dioxide would destroy the planet.
“The government’s education was motivating conduct through fear. Not only that, but the child was coached to take a hostile or disrespectful tone toward adults concerning this topic.”
Both families now face financial strain. They’ve been forced to pay for education costs public school parents never shoulder — or submit to government messaging they fundamentally reject.
Nebraska spent about $19,038 per student in the 2024-2025 school year. Lincoln Public Schools spent about $17,432.
Private elementary school tuition in Nebraska averages $7,100 per year. High school runs about $11,000. Homeschooling costs less in overhead but typically requires one parent to leave the workforce entirely.
The lawsuit cites the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor, which held the government cannot condition the benefit of a free public education on parents accepting instruction that violates their First Amendment rights.
Another Supreme Court precedent says the unconstitutional conditions doctrine prevents the government from coercing people into surrendering enumerated constitutional rights.
The families are not asking the court to change Lincoln Public Schools’ curriculum or dictate a legislative remedy.
They want the court to declare Nebraska’s system unconstitutional and award them damages equal to the per-pupil funding Lincoln Public Schools receives.
“That formal education is speech is largely undisputable. That parents have the primary right to provide educational speech to their children is legally established,” said Zhonette Brown, general counsel at NCLA. “Courts have long recognized speech rights in the education context, protecting parents’ educational speech is the next logical step.”
The case could set a nationwide precedent for states with zero school choice options — forcing them to either fund alternatives or face constitutional liability.
