I write this commentary from the perspective of a political philosopher rather than that of a constitutional lawyer. Political philosophers and legal theorists struggle with questions regarding the limits of multicultural toleration in the liberal state, questions that are worked out in practice in the context of legal disputes over constitutional principles. Questions about the competing interests of individuals, cultural minority groups and the state are put into sharp relief in controversies over the ways in which children are educated. The Yoder case has been taken up by many political theorists as an ideal lens through which to explore these issues. However, I will argue that some of the unique features of Amish culture, the location of the Amish in the American imagination, and the facts of this particular case may shape its relevance for a broader class of cases. One key factor that is often overlooked is the differentiated impact that gender norms in the Amish community have on the opportunities of boys and girls. Justice Murray provides a corrective to this lacuna in both the original judgment and philosophical consideration of it, delineating the limits of the reproduction of Amish patriarchy at the heart of her rewritten opinion.