Another Try at a Parents' Rights Amendment to the Constitution

On August 1, 2017 Senator Lindsey Graham (SC) (with Senators Blunt, Isakson, Risch, Grassley, and Rubio) introduced S.J. Res. 48, an amendment to the Constitution on parents’ rights. Here is the text:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

“Article  —

“ Section 1. The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children is a fundamental right.

“ Section 2. The parental right to direct education includes the right to choose, as an alternative to public education, private, religious, or home schools, and the right to make reasonable choices within public schools for one’s child.

“ Section 3. Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe these rights without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.

“ Section 4. The parental rights guaranteed by this article shall not be denied or abridged on account of disability.

“ Section 5. This article shall not be construed to apply to a parental action or decision that would end life.

“ Section 6. No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.”.

On November 8, 2013, in this blog I wrote a post about another version of this proposed amendment. Its text was similar in intent, but emphasized educational settings and did not specifically reference disabilities (section 4 above.) Here it is:

The 2013 Proposed Parental Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

SECTION 1

The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children is a fundamental right. 

SECTION 2

The parental right to direct education includes the right to choose public, private, religious, or home schools, and the right to make reasonable choices within public schools for one's child.

SECTION 3

Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe these rights without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.

SECTION 4

This article shall not be construed to apply to a parental action or decision that would end life.

SECTION 5

No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.

With regard to both the 2013 version and 2017 version of the parental rights amendment to the Constitution, 38 state legislatures would need to approve the amendment before it would become a Constitutional amendment. That could take a long time. The language in the 2017 proposed amendment is very broad. If it were voted into effect, there would probably be a ton of litigation to clarify things in education and health matters, as well as other things. The U.S. educational community is diverse, in some places struggling, and needs time and funding to implement evidence-based reforms. What would happen to the Individuals with Disabilities Act if this amendment were to become law?

Educators need to strengthen and expand their partnerships with parents. The impasse on health care is creating uncertainty in the healthcare market, 1/6 of our economy. S.J. Res. 48 would do the same thing to our education system, creating uncertainty. It would possibly pit parents against educators, instead of fostering partnerships. We are exposed to one statement after another, saying states and local communities know what to do and need more flexibility and the federal government needs to get out of the way. This amendment would be counter to that proposition, undermine the fabric of communities, and create legal tensions where there are none. Senator Graham surely has other more productive ways to spend his time.

Thank you.

Common Grounder