WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 2244

A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 15.1-06 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to parental involvement in a child's education; and to amend and reenact section 14-09-32.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to a parent's interest in a child's upbringing.

69th Legislative Assembly (2025-26) Introduced by Dori Hauck and 5 co-sponsors

SB 2244 expands parental involvement requirements in North Dakota schools and child upbringing decisions; failed passage with 41-49 vote.

Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 41 nays 49
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 2244

Legislative bill overview

SB 2244 would create new legal protections requiring parental involvement in decisions regarding a child's education and upbringing, modifying existing North Dakota Century Code sections on parental rights. The bill appears designed to expand parental notification and consent requirements in school-related matters, though the specific provisions are not detailed in the legislative record provided.

Why is this important

Parental rights in education directly affect millions of students and families, influencing what information schools must share with parents and what decisions require parental consent. The tension between parental authority and school administrative authority is a persistent policy debate with implications for child welfare, family autonomy, and educational operations.

Potential points of contention

  • Scope of parental involvement: Unclear which specific educational decisions would require parental notification or consent (curriculum choices, mental health support, gender identity matters, medical services, etc.)
  • School operational burden: Expanded parental consent requirements could create administrative challenges and delays in addressing student needs, particularly in time-sensitive situations
  • Child privacy and autonomy: Mandatory parental notification on all matters may conflict with student confidentiality, counselor-client privilege, and adolescent privacy rights in sensitive areas
  • Disagreement on legislative intent: The bill failed in committee and on second reading, suggesting significant bipartisan or cross-factional opposition to its approach

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.