Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Constitutional Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee sends constitutional amendment to floor to recognize parental right to direct children’s education
Summary
House Joint Resolution 1, a proposed constitutional amendment to affirm parents’ right to direct the education of their children outside public schools, was sent to the House floor with a due-pass recommendation after testimony from sponsors and education advocates; one committee member recorded a no vote.
The House State Affairs Committee voted to send House Joint Resolution 1 to the House floor with a due‑pass recommendation. The joint resolution would amend the state constitution to replace language permitting the legislature to require public-school attendance with a provision recognizing "the right of the people to educate their children without government regulation outside of the public school of the state shall not be infringed," according to materials presented to the committee.
Representative Dale Hawkins, the bill sponsor, said the resolution "is just recognizing the natural right" of parents to direct their children’s education and said it aligns statutory law with existing U.S. Supreme Court rulings. Supporters who testified included Scott Herndon (self-identified), Samuel O'Laire of the Idaho Freedom Foundation's Center for American Education, and parent Arlene Herndon. Scott Herndon said the amendment "is simply eliminating the butts in seats" language from the constitution and that Idaho Code §33‑202 (the compulsory-education statute) would remain in force to prevent educational neglect.
Committee members pressed several issues. Representative Achilles said he would vote no, saying the change could be read as weakening the state’s authority to require compulsory education and worried about unaccredited or unlicensed instruction. Representative Mickelson and others asked whether the amendment could unintentionally permit parents to avoid educating children; supporters and witnesses repeatedly said the amendment recognizes parental direction but does not create a right not to educate and pointed to existing statutes that define educational neglect.
Scott Herndon and supporters said the proposal is intended to enshrine protections already present in statute and constitutional case law and to make those protections harder to remove in the future. Representative Crane moved to send HJR1 to the floor with a due-pass recommendation; the motion carried on a voice vote and the transcript records Representative Achilles as recorded voting no.
The committee hearing included several public witnesses who described homeschooling outcomes and philosophical arguments for parental authority; the transcript does not show a roll-call tally beyond the recorded no. If approved by both legislative chambers, the proposed constitutional amendment would later go to voters for ratification.
