Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Family Visitation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves ‘Tara’s Law’ to expand grandparents’ visitation rights
Summary
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted to pass House Bill 17-99, called “Tara’s Law,” which adds three circumstances in which grandparents may petition for visitation—court-found parental unfitness, clear-and-convincing evidence of compelling circumstances, and post-death stepparent adoptions—after testimony that sponsor worked closely with judges to craft nonobjectionable language.
The Senate Judiciary Committee on a voice vote approved House Bill 17-99, commonly called “Tara’s Law,” which would expand the circumstances under which grandparents may petition Arkansas courts for visitation with their grandchildren.
Representative Rushing, the bill’s sponsor, told the panel she developed the measure after a family tragedy and described the proposed changes as targeted, not custodial. “This is not custody rights. This is just visitation rights,” she said, summarizing three added bases for petitions: where a court previously has found a parent unfit; where a court finds by clear and convincing evidence that compelling circumstances make contact with grandparents in the child’s best interest; and where a stepparent adopts following the death of a biological parent.
Judge Tom Smith of the Benton County juvenile court, who identified himself for the record, told senators the judicial council took no official position on the bill but that Representative Rushing had worked closely with judges to develop language they found acceptable. “We took no official position on this bill,” Judge Smith said, adding that the sponsor had consulted judges and refined the draft.
Committee members asked whether the bill was intended to restore or change existing law; the sponsor and witnesses said the measure largely codifies approaches used in other states and is limited to visitation, not custody. Several senators noted similar language exists in other jurisdictions and cited Troxell v. Granville as relevant precedent.
A motion to report the bill “do pass” carried on a voice vote. The committee did not record individual roll-call votes during the voice vote; the chair announced the motion carried and congratulated Representative Rushing on passage to the next stage.
Next steps: HB 17-99 will be scheduled for floor consideration according to normal legislative procedures.
