Home School Heartbeat Radio Program

Historically, the Supreme Court has looked favorably on parental rights, but is that likely to continue? Join Mike Farris as he looks into this question, today on Home School Heartbeat.

Michael Farris:
Since 1925, parental rights have been guaranteed constitutional protection as implied rights. However, this view is changing.

In the Court's most recent parental rights decision, Troxel v. Granville, Justice Scalia made it clear that he supports the concept of parental rights. However, because these rights are not explicitly stated, Scalia voted to deny parental rights the status of an enforceable constitutional right. In short, Scalia believes that no right is protected unless it is expressly stated in the Constitution.

Most of us like Scalia's reasoning when it's used to argue against the so-called right to an abortion. But we'd be quite alarmed if, by the same reasoning, parental rights were suddenly no longer a protected constitutional right.

In Troxel, the nine Supreme Court justices expressed varied opinions on parental rights. Of the four justices who held that parental rights deserved the highest level of constitutional protection, two-Rehnquist and O'Connor-have now been replaced by Justices Roberts and Alito. Doing a quick headcount, there's no reason to believe that parental rights are currently safe.

Moreover, we shouldn't rest our confidence for the future of these rights on the protection of the current Supreme Court justices. We must find more permanent protection. It's time to put parents' rights into the Constitution—parents' rights in black and white.

I'm Mike Farris.