The 2025 Texas Parental Rights Amendment: How Proposition 15 and SB 2052 Reshape the Burden of Proof in Parent vs. Nonparent Custody Cases
In November 2025, Texas voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment that explicitly recognizes parents’ fundamental right to the care, custody, and control of their children. Combined with targeted 2025 legislation, this change significantly strengthens the legal position of fit parents when third parties seek conservatorship or access. For families in Collin, Grayson, Denton, and surrounding North Texas counties, the practical effect is a higher evidentiary bar for nonparents at trial and greater protection for parental decision-making.
This post examines the constitutional change, its legislative history, the updated statutory framework, existing court interpretations, and the specific implications for cases involving third-party conservators.
The Constitutional Change: Article I, Section 37
On November 4, 2025, Texas voters approved Proposition 15 (Senate Joint Resolution 34 from the 89th Legislature) by a margin of approximately 70% to 30%. The measure added Section 37 to Article I of the Texas Constitution:
“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.”
This language constitutionalizes long-recognized parental rights drawn from U.S. Supreme Court precedent (Troxel v. Granville) and Texas case law. By placing these rights in the state constitution, the amendment subjects any government or court action that substantially interferes with them to strict scrutiny — the highest level of judicial review. The state (or a court order) must now demonstrate that the interference is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest.
The amendment took effect immediately upon voter approval on November 4, 2025.
Legislative History and Companion Statute (SB 2052)
Proposition 15 originated as SJR 34 in the 2025 legislative session. It passed the Senate unanimously (31-0) and the House with strong support (112-22). The measure required only a two-thirds vote in one session to reach the ballot.
To give the constitutional principle immediate statutory force, the Legislature also passed Senate Bill 2052 (89th Leg., R.S.), effective September 1, 2025. SB 2052 amended key provisions of the Texas Family Code, most notably Section 153.002, and added new procedural requirements.
Under the updated §153.002:
The best interest of the child remains the primary consideration.
In any suit between a parent and a nonparent, there is a rebuttable presumption that (1) a parent acts in the child’s best interest, and (2) it is in the child’s best interest to be in the care, custody, and control of a parent.
A nonparent may overcome this presumption only by clear and convincing evidence that denial of the relief requested would significantly impair the child’s physical health or emotional development.
If the court grants relief to the nonparent, it must include specific findings in the order stating the facts supporting the impairment conclusion and the extent to which the presumption was overcome.
SB 2052 also created new §102.0031, requiring nonparents filing or intervening in SAPCRs to submit a detailed affidavit with facts supporting the “significant impairment” allegation, and new §156.008, which applies similar heightened requirements in modification proceedings between parents and nonparents.
These changes codify and strengthen the Texas Supreme Court’s holding in In re C.J.C. (2020), which already required application of the fit-parent presumption in modification cases involving nonparents.
How the Burden at Trial Has Changed
Prior to these developments, nonparents already faced a meaningful hurdle under existing law and In re C.J.C.. The 2025 changes raise that bar in several concrete ways:
Constitutional Elevation to Fundamental Right Status — What was previously a strong statutory and common-law presumption is now explicitly a fundamental right under the Texas Constitution. Courts must interpret statutes and exercise discretion in a manner that avoids unconstitutional infringement.
Strict Scrutiny Framework — Any court order that significantly interferes with a fit parent’s care, custody, or control (such as awarding managing conservatorship or substantial access rights to a third party over the parent’s objection) is now subject to strict scrutiny analysis. This shifts the analytical focus from a pure “best interest” balancing test to whether the order is narrowly tailored to a compelling state interest.
Heightened Evidentiary Standard in Practice — While the statutory text retains the “clear and convincing evidence of significant impairment” standard, the constitutional overlay encourages courts to apply it more rigorously. Generalized testimony that a third party “would be better for the child” or that the parent’s lifestyle is “not ideal” is unlikely to suffice. Courts will expect specific, credible evidence — often including expert testimony — demonstrating actual, significant harm to the child’s physical health or emotional development if the parent retains primary rights.
Required Specific Findings — Judges must now make detailed, on-the-record findings. This creates a stronger appellate record for parents and makes it harder for trial courts to grant nonparent relief without robust justification.
Implications for Cases Involving Third-Party Conservators
The changes have particularly significant effects in disputes where grandparents, stepparents, other relatives, fictive kin, or other nonparents seek managing conservatorship, joint managing conservatorship, or expanded possessory rights.
Standing Remains a Threshold Hurdle Nonparents must still establish standing under Texas Family Code §102.003 or other specific provisions (e.g., grandparent access under §153.433 in limited circumstances). The new affidavit requirement under §102.0031 adds an early procedural filter.
Overcoming the Presumption Is Now Even More Demanding Even with standing, the nonparent must prove by clear and convincing evidence that denying their requested relief would significantly impair the child’s physical health or emotional development. The constitutional fundamental right makes it more difficult for courts to substitute their judgment (or the third party’s) for that of a fit parent.
Modifications Involving Prior Orders In modification proceedings, the new §156.008 clarifies that the presumption cannot be overcome simply because a prior order (even one agreed to by the parent) granted relief to the nonparent. Parents retain strong protection unless the high statutory and constitutional standard is met.
Extraordinary Nature of Third-Party Managing Conservatorship Awarding a nonparent sole or joint managing conservatorship over a fit parent’s objection is now an even more extraordinary remedy. Courts will likely reserve it for cases involving clear parental unfitness, abandonment, or situations where the child faces genuine, documented harm. Routine “best interest” comparisons that favor a more stable or affluent third party are constitutionally suspect.
Practical Effects in North Texas Courts In Collin, Grayson, Denton, and Fannin County family courts, practitioners should expect:
Earlier and more vigorous challenges to nonparent interventions and petitions.
Greater emphasis on expert evidence regarding actual impairment rather than lifestyle or comparative parenting critiques.
Stronger leverage for parents in mediation and settlement negotiations involving third-party claims.
More detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law in final orders.
Unresolved Questions and Ongoing Litigation
The full scope of the amendment remains subject to judicial interpretation. In In re Interest of K.N. (decided June 5, 2026), the Texas Supreme Court declined to fully resolve the amendment’s impact on the standard for terminating parental rights in a CPS case, leaving that question for lower courts to address in the first instance. Amicus arguments advanced strict scrutiny and, in some views, an even higher burden (beyond a reasonable doubt) for certain deprivations of parental rights.
Private custody disputes between parents and nonparents have not yet produced definitive published appellate guidance applying the new constitutional provision. Practitioners should monitor emerging case law closely, as early trial court decisions will shape how strictly the “significant impairment” standard is applied in light of the fundamental right.
Practical Takeaways for Families and Practitioners
For parents facing third-party claims: Document your involvement, maintain consistent parenting, and consult counsel early. The constitutional and statutory changes provide powerful tools to protect your decision-making authority.
For third parties considering intervention: Recognize that the path to conservatorship is narrower. Focus on concrete evidence of significant impairment rather than general best-interest arguments. Early case assessment with experienced counsel is essential.
For attorneys handling complex SAPCRs in North Texas: These developments require updated pleadings, more rigorous discovery on impairment issues, and careful attention to the required findings. The interplay between the constitutional fundamental right, the updated §153.002 presumption, and procedural hurdles in SB 2052 will be central to strategy in any case involving a nonparent seeking conservatorship or substantial access.
The 2025 Parental Rights Amendment and its statutory companions represent a significant strengthening of parental authority in Texas family law. While the core “best interest of the child” standard remains, the framework for balancing that interest against parental rights has shifted meaningfully in favor of fit parents — particularly when third parties seek to displace or share primary conservatorship.
If you are a parent facing a third-party conservatorship claim, a nonparent considering legal options, or a practitioner navigating these issues in Collin, Grayson, or surrounding counties, the team at Becker Family Law is available to provide strategic guidance tailored to the current legal landscape.
This article is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Family law outcomes depend on the specific facts of each case. Consult qualified Texas family law counsel regarding your situation.