6,053
edits
Texas Constitution talk:Article I, Section 37 (edit)
Revision as of 10:02, October 22, 2025
, Wednesday at 10:02→HRO: new section
mNo edit summary |
(→HRO: new section) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Some questions were raised during legislative discussions about how the proposal would ensure children’s voices are also heard. More recently, various advocacy groups have expressed opposition to the constitutional amendment’s broad language. Education and reproductive rights groups say other provisions in Texas law already recognize parental rights and that the amendment could be used to justify censorship and further restrict access to reproductive and gender-affirming care. The group Accountability Matters has also raised concerns that the vague language of the amendment could lead to costly legal fights over its meaning and enable more state oversight. | Some questions were raised during legislative discussions about how the proposal would ensure children’s voices are also heard. More recently, various advocacy groups have expressed opposition to the constitutional amendment’s broad language. Education and reproductive rights groups say other provisions in Texas law already recognize parental rights and that the amendment could be used to justify censorship and further restrict access to reproductive and gender-affirming care. The group Accountability Matters has also raised concerns that the vague language of the amendment could lead to costly legal fights over its meaning and enable more state oversight. | ||
== HRO == | |||
Digest: | |||
Supporters say: | |||
By enshrining in the Texas Constitution the right of a | |||
parent to exercise care, custody, and control of the parent’s | |||
children, Proposition 15 would provide a clear and solid | |||
legal foundation to protect parental rights. | |||
Courts have long recognized that parents have a | |||
constitutionally protected right to make decisions for their | |||
children. This proposition would codify longstanding case | |||
law in the Texas Constitution to ensure that this important | |||
right could not be removed or diminished by future court | |||
opinions. The parent-child relationship is rooted in natural | |||
law and should be safeguarded. Proposition 15 also would | |||
make accessing the right simpler, less costly, and easier for | |||
parents and lawyers, allowing them to cite the Constitution to | |||
help defend their rights in court. | |||
Critics say: | |||
Proposition 15 focuses too heavily on the rights | |||
of parents without including language to ensure that | |||
children’s rights and best interests are protected. The | |||
proposition should further emphasize the duties and | |||
responsibilities of parents to their children so that parental | |||
rights cannot override fundamental children’s rights, such | |||
as the right to basic healthcare or mental health support, as | |||
well as the ability of children to have their psychological, | |||
emotional, and social needs met. | |||
Other critics say: | |||
While protecting parental rights is essential, | |||
Proposition 15 contains language that is too vague | |||
and, as worded, could impose obligations on parents | |||
or undermine parents’ rights if it were determined that | |||
parents have not met their responsibilities. | |||