5,933
edits
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|recent= | |recent= | ||
* ''State v. Loe'', 692 S.W.3d 215, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9682881558926563485#p230 230-31] (citations omitted) (Tex. 2024) ("But neither our society's history and legal traditions nor this Court's precedents support a view of the scope of parents' constitutionally protected interest in directing their children's care, custody, and control that would place any action a parent may undertake outside the government's authority to regulate. . . . [A] fit parent's fundamental interest in caring for her child free from government interference extends to choosing from among legally available medical treatments, but it never has been understood to permit a parent to demand medical treatment that is not legally available.") | * ''State v. Loe'', 692 S.W.3d 215, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9682881558926563485#p230 230-31] (citations omitted) (Tex. 2024) ("But neither our society's history and legal traditions nor this Court's precedents support a view of the scope of parents' constitutionally protected interest in directing their children's care, custody, and control that would place ''any'' action a parent may undertake outside the government's authority to regulate. . . . [A] fit parent's fundamental interest in caring for her child free from government interference extends to choosing from among legally available medical treatments, but it never has been understood to permit a parent to demand medical treatment that is not legally available.") | ||
|historic= | |historic= |