Article I, Section 37 of the Texas Constitution ("Rights and Responsibilities of Parents")

Revision as of 09:01, October 30, 2025 by Admin (talk | contribs)

Added November 4, 2025:

To enshrine truths that are deeply rooted in this nation's history and traditions, the people of Texas hereby affirm that a parent has the responsibility to nurture and protect the parent's child and the corresponding fundamental right to exercise care, custody, and control of the parent's child, including the right to make decisions concerning the child's upbringing.

Editor Comments

According to available legislative history, the purpose of this section is to codify parents' existing federal constitutional rights in the state constitution.

Attorney Steve Smith

Recent Decisions

  • State v. Loe, 692 S.W.3d 215, 230-31 (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. . . . Said differently, 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 Decisions

  • Holick v. Smith, 685 S.W.2d 18, 20 (Tex. 1985) (citations omitted) ("This natural parental right has been characterized as 'essential,' 'a basic civil right of man,' and 'far more precious than property rights.' A termination decree is complete, final, irrevocable and divests for all time that natural right as well as all legal rights, privileges, duties and powers . . . . Moreover, the evidence in support of termination must be clear and convincing before a court may involuntarily terminate a parent's rights. Consequently, termination proceedings should be strictly scrutinized, and involuntary termination statutes are strictly construed in favor of the parent.")
  • Byrne v. Love, 14 Tex. 81, 91 (1855) ("Thereisno a and afather doubt guardian, especially
control, nature, as inthe guardian authority has by veryample
that he and education ofhis management, children; rearing

92 SUPREME COURT.

v. Love. Byrne
their lands maylease untilhisdeath until arrive at the or they
of he age that themfor under the majority; may years place
and superintendence others, control of and act is where such
not so to infant to the of injurious the as require interposition
Court, the it cannot by be either the infant or disputed, by
others. A...")

Library Resources

Online Resources