This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

It now is up to the U.S. Supreme Court to sort out the proper precedent for whether public school students in America can be forcibly indoctrinated with Islamic teachings.

Such as the lesson imposed on students in Chatham Middle School in New Jersey, where seventh-grade students were taught, as fact, "May God help us all find the true faith, Islam."

The fight originated nearly a decade ago when Libby Hilsenrath challenged the district's indoctrination of Islamic beliefs.

The Thomas More Law Center of Michigan now has filed a reply brief on her behalf with the high court, the final written plea for the justices to reverse lower court decisions allowing the teachings.

Hilsenrath had raised concerns as a parent about the school's religious indoctrination. Seventh grade students at the school were ordered to watch a five-minute video, "Intro to Islam," that was "filled with purely Islamic religious beliefs presented as facts during a mandated class in World Cultures and Geography."

Students were ordered to take notes on:

"Muhammad (Peace be upon him) is the last & final Messenger of God. God gave him the Noble Quran."

"What is the Noble Quran? Divine Revelation sent to Muhammad (S) last Prophet of Allah. A Perfect guide for Humanity."

"The Noble Quran: Guidance, Mercy and Blessing for all Mankind."

"The Noble Quran: Without any doubt and an eloquent guide from Allah."

"The Beautiful Quran: Guidance for the wise & sensible."

And "Islam: A shining beacon against the darkness of repression, segregation, intolerance and racism … ."

The bias was documented by the fact the school allowed no similar proselytizing videos involving any other faith, such as Christianity and Judaism.

The lower courts' approval of the teaching is "inconsistent with previous Supreme Court opinions that gave parents and students broad protection from subtle coercive pressures in school settings under the Establishment Clause," the TMLC said.

While the recent Kennedy v. Bremerton decision allows a coach to pray on school property, that ruling didn't overturn any previous precedents, the legal team explained.

The filing argues, "Establishment Clause prevents schools from advancing religious views that may conflict with the private beliefs of the student and his or her family."

"Lower courts have struggled to determine whether Kennedy articulated a new Establishment Clause test, what that test is, and what impact, if any, that test has on the long-standing Establishment Clause precedents which safeguard parents and their students against coercion in public schools," the legal team said. "Only the Supreme Court can resolve the lower courts' confusion and confirm the heightened protection parents and students enjoy under the Establishment Clause in the public-school setting."

The filing states, "The Free Exercise Clause safeguards 'the rights of parents to direct 'the religious upbringing' of their children.' … The Establishment Clause protects the same right of religious belief for parents and their children."

Further, existing precedent is that, "Families entrust public schools with the education of their children, but condition their trust on the understanding that the classroom will not purposely be used to advance religious views that may conflict with the private beliefs of the student and his or her family."

The dispute is that the district claims it can use "religious texts and teachings" in its classes, but the issue actually is more specific, about the use of "lessons that proselytize or promote a religion that conflicts with a parent's or child's religious beliefs" and whether that violates the Constitution.