relating to the right to educate children.Providing that parents and guardians have a right to direct the education of their children.
Summary
CACR 24 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would add a new article to the New Hampshire Constitution recognizing that parents and legal guardians have the right to direct the education of their children. The measure states that parents and guardians are the primary educators of their children and that this right “shall not be violated.” If approved by voters, the amendment would be placed in the first part of the constitution as Article 2-c, titled in the introduced version as a “Right of Parental Privacy in Education.”
The resolution does not itself change statutory education policy, but it would create a constitutional right that could affect how state and local education laws are interpreted and enforced. By elevating parental direction of education to constitutional status, the amendment could influence disputes involving curriculum, school policies, instructional materials, and the scope of authority held by public schools and state education officials. It would be submitted to voters at the November 2026 general election and would take effect only if approved by two-thirds of those voting on the amendment and then proclaimed adopted by the governor.
The available voting history suggests the proposal drew majority support in the House, with 181 yeas and 155 nays on the recorded OTPA vote. That margin indicates the bill had meaningful support, but not broad consensus. No committee transcript was provided, so the record does not show detailed debate, but the vote itself suggests the issue was politically significant and somewhat divided.
The main point of contention is the balance between parental rights and the authority of schools or the state to set educational standards. Supporters are likely to view the amendment as protecting family control over education and reinforcing parental primacy, while opponents may be concerned that the language is broad and could be used to challenge public-school policies, curriculum requirements, or other educational regulations. The phrasing “right to direct the education” and “shall not be violated” may also raise questions about how far the constitutional protection would extend in practice.
Impact
If adopted, CACR 24 would amend the New Hampshire Constitution by adding a new constitutional right for parents and legal guardians to direct their children’s education. This would not directly rewrite the education statutes, but it would create a higher-level legal standard that could affect interpretation of existing laws governing public schools, curriculum, school board authority, and parental involvement. Any state or local education policy inconsistent with the new constitutional right could face legal challenge.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received mixed but substantial support. The House vote of 181-155 on OTPA shows a favorable outcome, but also a sizable minority in opposition, suggesting the proposal was controversial rather than unanimous. Because no committee discussion transcript is available, the broader sentiment can only be inferred from the vote and the subject matter: supporters likely framed it as a parental-rights measure, while opponents likely viewed it as potentially disruptive to public education governance.
Contention
The central contention is whether the constitution should explicitly elevate parental control over education above other educational interests. Supporters likely argue that parents should have the primary say in their children’s schooling and that the amendment protects family autonomy. Opponents are likely concerned that the language is too broad, could undermine school authority, and might be used to challenge curriculum standards, classroom instruction, or administrative policies. The title change from “Right of Parental Privacy in Education” to “right to educate children” also suggests a possible debate over the scope and framing of the right.
Requiring courts to order a minor and their family have psychological evaluations and, if necessary, counseling, where parental rights and responsibilities are contested in a family court matter.
Relative to mandatory disclosure by school district employees to parents and relative to enforcement of parental rights against school districts and school employees.