The Family Freedom Project does extensive work in the Texas legislature to protect the rights of Texas parents, but many people don’t realize how much the destiny of Texas families is shaped by the courts.
Currently, a court in Austin is considering a case that could have major implications for Texas families. In Loe v. Texas, the ACLU and Lambda Legal are suing the state to block the implementation of Senate Bill 14, a bill passed by the Texas legislature which would prohibit gender transition surgeries and drug treatments on minors.
Among other things, they are arguing that a ban on gender transition treatment for minors violates the rights of parents to make medical decisions under the Texas Constitution.
To address that question, the court will have to decide what rights the TX Constitution grants to parents.
The correct answer is essentially exactly what we drafted in our TX constitutional amendment earlier this year: Parents have the right to make medical decisions for their children. However, nobody, parent or otherwise, has the right to make decisions that cause irreversible damage to a child through experimental medical procedures.
The state is arguing that SB 14 is protecting children from just such a fate. The ACLU argues that gender transition treatments on minors are just like any other medical procedures a parent may consent to.
There are two issues in this case. The first question is what the law says on parental rights. The second is how that law applies to the medical procedures targeted by SB 14.
As we have long maintained, the law is clear that parents do have the right to make medical decisions for their child and that those decisions can be blocked by the state only if two criteria are met:
- The state’s interference is necessary to protect the child from a clearly identifiable harm (in legal terms, that the state has a “compelling interest”)
- That the interference is no greater than is necessary to protect the child from that particular harm (that the intervention is “narrowly tailored”)
Because of the issues involved, there is a major risk and a major reward opportunity in this case:
- The risk is that other groups will be willing to sacrifice critical parental rights precedents in order to get the law upheld.
- The reward could be a strong precedent protecting parental rights into the future.
Because of our long history of work on parental rights, FFP is positioned to clearly articulate to the court the legal pathway by which the law can be upheld without weakening parental rights. There is even an opportunity for them to be strengthened.
The trial court issued a temporary injunction blocking the law from going into effect, but that injunction has since been appealed to the Texas Supreme Court.
The law went into effect on September 1 and the high court is currently considering whether the law should be temporarily blocked while a full trial is conducted.
After a ruling from the Texas Supreme Court on the injunction, a trial will then commence, and then two more appeals are likely to follow. We will brief each of those appeals. We expect a total of 4 briefs.
This is just another example of the fact that parental rights is at risk in our society and we must be ever vigilant to make sure that no attack or potential attack against parents’ right to raise their children as they see fit goes uncontested.
Thank you for standing with us as we work to Keep Texas Families Free!
Make sure you are signed up for our email and text messages to be ready to take immediate action to protect the parents and families of Texas.
Please sign our petitions to support these measures and get updates as parental rights reforms move through the Texas Legislature.
Tim Lambert, THSC President
Tim Lambert, has been the president of the Texas Home School Coalition since 1990 and involved in homeschool leadership since 1984. He and his wife Lyndsay taught their four now-grown children at home for 16 years, graduating the last two in 2000. As the head of the organization for the leading home school state in the country, he is recognized as an authority on home education issues.
Tim has testified before numerous Texas legislative committees on issues related to homeschooling and often deals with state government agencies, including the Texas Education Agency and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. He has also addressed such conferences as the Texas Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers on the topic. He holds a B.A. in political science from Texas Tech University and is active in the political arena, serving eight years as Republican National Committeeman for Texas. Tim is committed to serving the homeschooling community and to protecting parents’ right to choose the method of education of their children.
The Family Freedom Project does extensive work in the Texas legislature to protect the rights of Texas parents, but many people don’t realize how much the destiny of Texas families is shaped by the courts.
Currently, a court in Austin is considering a case that could have major implications for Texas families. In Loe v. Texas, the ACLU and Lambda Legal are suing the state to block the implementation of Senate Bill 14, a bill passed by the Texas legislature which would prohibit gender transition surgeries and drug treatments on minors.
Among other things, they are arguing that a ban on gender transition treatment for minors violates the rights of parents to make medical decisions under the Texas Constitution.
To address that question, the court will have to decide what rights the TX Constitution grants to parents.
The correct answer is essentially exactly what we drafted in our TX constitutional amendment earlier this year: Parents have the right to make medical decisions for their children. However, nobody, parent or otherwise, has the right to make decisions that cause irreversible damage to a child through experimental medical procedures.
The state is arguing that SB 14 is protecting children from just such a fate. The ACLU argues that gender transition treatments on minors are just like any other medical procedures a parent may consent to.
There are two issues in this case. The first question is what the law says on parental rights. The second is how that law applies to the medical procedures targeted by SB 14.
As we have long maintained, the law is clear that parents do have the right to make medical decisions for their child and that those decisions can be blocked by the state only if two criteria are met:
- The state’s interference is necessary to protect the child from a clearly identifiable harm (in legal terms, that the state has a “compelling interest”)
- That the interference is no greater than is necessary to protect the child from that particular harm (that the intervention is “narrowly tailored”)
Because of the issues involved, there is a major risk and a major reward opportunity in this case:
- The risk is that other groups will be willing to sacrifice critical parental rights precedents in order to get the law upheld.
- The reward could be a strong precedent protecting parental rights into the future.
Because of our long history of work on parental rights, FFP is positioned to clearly articulate to the court the legal pathway by which the law can be upheld without weakening parental rights. There is even an opportunity for them to be strengthened.
The trial court issued a temporary injunction blocking the law from going into effect, but that injunction has since been appealed to the Texas Supreme Court.
The law went into effect on September 1 and the high court is currently considering whether the law should be temporarily blocked while a full trial is conducted.
After a ruling from the Texas Supreme Court on the injunction, a trial will then commence, and then two more appeals are likely to follow. We will brief each of those appeals. We expect a total of 4 briefs.
This is just another example of the fact that parental rights is at risk in our society and we must be ever vigilant to make sure that no attack or potential attack against parents’ right to raise their children as they see fit goes uncontested.
Thank you for standing with us as we work to Keep Texas Families Free!
Make sure you are signed up for our email and text messages to be ready to take immediate action to protect the parents and families of Texas.
Please sign our petitions to support these measures and get updates as parental rights reforms move through the Texas Legislature.
Tim Lambert, THSC President
Tim Lambert, has been the president of the Texas Home School Coalition since 1990 and involved in homeschool leadership since 1984. He and his wife Lyndsay taught their four now-grown children at home for 16 years, graduating the last two in 2000. As the head of the organization for the leading home school state in the country, he is recognized as an authority on home education issues.
Tim has testified before numerous Texas legislative committees on issues related to homeschooling and often deals with state government agencies, including the Texas Education Agency and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. He has also addressed such conferences as the Texas Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers on the topic. He holds a B.A. in political science from Texas Tech University and is active in the political arena, serving eight years as Republican National Committeeman for Texas. Tim is committed to serving the homeschooling community and to protecting parents’ right to choose the method of education of their children.
