Families’ Rights and Responsibilities Act
Sponsored By: Representative Foxx
Introduced
Summary
A federal fundamental right for parents to direct their children's upbringing, education, and health care. This bill would require the government to justify any substantial burden on that right by showing a compelling interest and using the least restrictive means.
Show full summary
- Parents and families: Would recognize parental decisionmaking as a fundamental right, so federal actions that substantially burden parenting must meet the highest level of judicial review.
- Education and health decisions: Would explicitly protect the right to direct a child's education and moral or religious upbringing and to access medical records and consent to physical and mental health care. The act excludes actions that would cause serious physical injury or death.
- Enforcement and federal agencies: Would apply to all federal laws and their implementation, push courts and agencies to interpret laws in favor of parental authority, and let successful litigants recover attorney's fees under federal fee-shifting rules including 42 U.S.C. 1988(b) and certain administrative adjudications under 5 U.S.C. 504(b)(1)(C).
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
2 provisions identified: 2 benefits, 0 costs, 0 mixed.
Parents' right to direct kids' care
If enacted, parents’ right to direct a child’s upbringing, education, and health care would be treated as a fundamental right. Government could not substantially burden that right unless it has a compelling interest and uses the least restrictive way. Protected choices would include schooling, moral or religious teaching, and access to and consent for medical and mental health care. The Act would apply to all federal laws and actions, past and future, unless a later law clearly opts out. It would define who counts as a parent and government, and what a “substantial burden” is, including withholding benefits, penalties, or program exclusion. These protections would not apply to actions needed to prevent serious physical injury or loss of life. These rules would take effect upon enactment.
Parents could sue and recover fees
If enacted, parents could raise a claim or defense under this Act in state or federal court, or before an agency judge. Courts would apply normal standing rules. If a parent wins in court, they could seek reasonable attorney’s fees under the existing civil rights fee law. If a parent wins in an administrative hearing, they could also seek reasonable attorney’s fees. These tools would take effect upon enactment.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Foxx
NC • R
Cosponsors
Weber (TX)
TX • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
Rose
TN • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
Miller (IL)
IL • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
Bilirakis
FL • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
Higgins (LA)
LA • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
Guthrie
KY • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
Finstad
MN • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
Loudermilk
GA • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
McCormick
GA • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
Haridopolos
FL • R
Sponsored 1/23/2025
McDowell
NC • R
Sponsored 1/31/2025
Biggs (SC)
SC • R
Sponsored 4/3/2025
Nehls
TX • R
Sponsored 4/17/2025
Moore (UT)
UT • R
Sponsored 5/19/2025
Gooden
TX • R
Sponsored 6/9/2025
Donalds
FL • R
Sponsored 6/25/2025
Harrigan
NC • R
Sponsored 7/15/2025
Williams (TX)
TX • R
Sponsored 9/2/2025
Harris (NC)
NC • R
Sponsored 10/3/2025
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.govRelated Bills
HR38 — Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2025
National concealed-carry reciprocity. This bill would create nationwide recognition of state concealed-carry licenses so people with a valid photo ID and a state permit or the right to carry in their home State could carry a concealed handgun in many other States. - Gun owners and travelers: People not federally prohibited from firearms possession who hold a state concealed-carry license or are entitled to carry in their home State could carry a concealed handgun in States that issue permits or do not ban concealed carry. Machine guns and destructive devices are excluded. It would take effect 90 days after enactment. - State and property rights: States would keep the power to prohibit or restrict concealed carry on private property and on State or local government property. The bill also lists federal public lands and agencies where carrying would be allowed in publicly accessible areas, including National Park units and Forest Service land. - Criminal and civil protections: Officers may not arrest absent probable cause that the carry falls outside the law and prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt when the defense is raised. Prevailing defendants can recover reasonable attorney fees and may sue for deprivation of rights with damages.
HRES719 — Honoring the life and legacy of Charles "Charlie" James Kirk.
Condemns political violence. The resolution condemns the assassination of Charles 'Charlie' James Kirk, honors his life and leadership, and urges swift justice while offering sympathy to his family.
HR1301 — Death Tax Repeal Act
This bill would repeal the federal estate tax and the generation‑skipping transfer tax. It would also reshape gift tax rules by keeping tiered rates but creating a $10 million lifetime exemption indexed for inflation. - Heirs of people who die on or after enactment would not owe the federal estate tax. This removes that tax from those estates. - Donors and high‑net‑worth individuals would still face a gift tax, but under a tiered schedule from 18% to 35% and a $10 million lifetime exemption that is indexed for inflation after 2011. - Generation‑skipping transfers made on or after enactment would not be subject to the GST tax. Qualified domestic trusts for surviving spouses of decedents who died before enactment would follow transitional rules, including changed treatment of distributions after a 10‑year period beginning on the enactment date.
HR21 — Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act
Mandates care and penalties for infants born alive after an abortion. This bill would set standards of care, require reporting, create criminal penalties, and allow civil suits when an infant is born alive following an abortion. - Women and families: A woman on whom an abortion is performed may sue anyone who violates the law and recover objectively verifiable medical and psychological damages, punitive damages, and statutory damages equal to three times the cost of the abortion. Courts must award reasonable attorney's fees to prevailing plaintiffs and may award fees to defendants if a suit is frivolous. - Health care practitioners and facility employees: Any practitioner present at a birth resulting from an abortion must exercise the same professional skill, care, and diligence as for any other live-born infant of the same gestational age. Practitioners or employees who know of a failure to comply must immediately report the violation to appropriate State or Federal law enforcement. - Criminal and statutory consequences: Violators face fines, up to 5 years in prison, or both, and anyone who intentionally kills a born-alive infant is punished under the murder statute. The bill also updates chapter headings and adds statutory definitions for "abortion" and "attempt."
HR45 — FIND Act
Prevents federal contractors from excluding or limiting businesses in the firearm and ammunition industry. The bill would create a new procurement rule that requires prime contractors and many subcontractors to certify they have no policies that discriminate against defined firearm entities or firearm trade associations. - Firearm and ammunition businesses and trade associations: Would block contractors from refusing services, limiting operations beyond law, or making category-based exclusions against defined firearm entities or trade groups. - Prime contractors and subcontractors: Prime contractors must include a no-discrimination certification and may not award a first-tier subcontract worth more than 10 percent of the prime contract to an uncertified entity. The bill bans structuring tiers to evade that limit. - Federal agencies: Agency contracting officials would be required to add the certification and subcontract limits into procurement contracts for goods and services. A narrow sole-source exception is included. - Enforcement: A contractor that violates the clause would face termination for default and initiation of suspension or debarment proceedings.
HR3699 — Energy Choice Act
Preempt state and local limits on energy sources. This bill would bar a State or local government, and any state or local instrumentality or regulatory agency, from adopting, implementing, or enforcing laws, building codes, standards, or policies that prohibit or limit connecting, reconnecting, modifying, installing, transporting, distributing, expanding, or accessing an energy service based on the type or source of energy when that energy is sold in interstate commerce and delivered to an end-user.
Take It Personal
Get Your Personalized Policy View
Create a free account to save research, track policy impacts, and unlock your personalized versions of these pages.
Already have an account? Sign in