Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
Governor Cox’s Prayer Wasn’t Just Misguided—It Was Dangerous

Governor Cox’s Prayer Wasn’t Just Misguided—It Was Dangerous

Charlie Kirk’s Death Sparks Martyrdom Narrative Amid Rising Political Violence

Charlie Kirk’s Death Sparks Martyrdom Narrative Amid Rising Political Violence

Donald Trump and the Rise of Political Violence

Donald Trump and the Rise of Political Violence

President Trump’s Musing About Making War on Chicago Is an American Nightmare

President Trump’s Musing About Making War on Chicago Is an American Nightmare

Just the Facts: Congress at a Crossroads on Immigration—Legal Status, Secure Borders, and What Comes Next

Just the Facts: Congress at a Crossroads on Immigration—Legal Status, Secure Borders, and What Comes Next

Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Republican House members hold a press event to highlight the introduction in 2023.

Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images
Sarah Biffle
By Sarah BiffleJul 16, 2024
Sarah Biffle
See More Writings by author

Biffle is a podcast host and contributor at BillTrack50.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for a second Trump administration, includes an outline for a Parents' Bill of Rights, cementing parental considerations as a “top tier” right.

The proposal calls for passing legislation to ensure families have a "fair hearing in court when the federal government enforces policies that undermine their rights to raise, educate, and care for their children." Further, “the law would require the government to satisfy ‘strict scrutiny’ — the highest standard of judicial review — when the government infringes parental rights.”

So far, the heavy legislating has happened at the state level, with a number introducing legislation aimed at increasing parental involvement, transparency and accountability. There is a growing movement for parents to have more control over and insight into their children's education. Proponents believe greater parental involvement can lead to better educational outcomes. Most laws proposed by states purport to center around increasing transparency in educational systems, ensuring parents are informed about what their children are being taught, how schools are run, and how decisions are made.

These legislative efforts are often a response to our broader social and political movements, driving for increased parental involvement and oversight in schools. For instance, conservative groups have been particularly vocal about lessons around critical race theory and gender education, pushing for more parental control to adjust school curricula to align with their personal views and values.

What states have passed a parental bill of rights?

Such laws generally outline specific rights for parents regarding their control and influence over their children’s upbringing, primarily in the context of education. Arizona’s House Bill 2732 in 2010 was the first in the current effort to define parental rights concerning children's education, upbringing, and health care. The law specifically includes a parent's right to direct their child's education, access school records and be informed about the curriculum.

Utah passed Parental Rights in Public Education in 2014, specifying certain rights of a parent or guardian of a student enrolled in a public school. Florida’s 2021 Parental Rights in Education gave parents control over their child's education, health care decisions and moral upbringing, including provisions for greater transparency in educational materials and school policies.

Texas enacted two bills in 2023: The first allows parents to access and review instructional materials; the second prohibits public school systems from possessing, acquiring and purchasing “harmful library material that is sexually explicit, pervasively vulgar, or educationally unsuitable.”

Many other states have proposed and enacted similar bills over the last decade.

What are the drawbacks to this movement?

Excessive interference in curriculum can undermine the expertise of educators and educational institutions, resulting in a fragmented educational experience for students, especially if parents with diverse views impose conflicting demands on schools. Schools will face increased administrative burdens to comply with the proposed transparency, find a middle ground and fulfill reporting requirements. This diverts time and resources away from direct educational activities, impacting overall school function.

Further, there is an argument that this type of legislation can lead to censorship of educational materials, particularly those related to controversial or sensitive topics such as sex education, race and gender identity. This can limit students' exposure to diverse perspectives and critical thinking opportunities. Allowing parents to opt their children out of certain lessons or activities can lead to inconsistencies in educational standards and experiences, affecting the overall quality and cohesiveness of student's education.

What would be the impact of Project 2025’s proposed federal Parental Bill of Rights?

The focus on parental rights could prioritize voices of more vocal or organized groups, potentially neglecting the needs and rights of minority or marginalized students and families. The federal legislation will likely result in increased legal disputes between parents and schools, which are costly and time-consuming, draining already limited school resources. Also, the implementation of these laws can exacerbate social and political divisions, particularly in communities with diverse views, leading to conflicts between parents, educators, and school boards, creating a contentious educational environment.

Balancing parental rights with the needs and expertise of educators is crucial to address these concerns effectively. While Project 2025’s initiative reflects a growing trend across the United States to formalize and expand parental rights in the context of education and child welfare, careful consideration is needed to ensure these rights do not hinder the educational process and overall student welfare.

More articles about Project 2025


    Latest news

    Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.
    Electoral Reforms

    Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

    The Jobs Report Is a Warning, Not a Blip
    Business & Democracy

    The Jobs Report Is a Warning, Not a Blip

    Donald Trump
    Governance & Legislation

    The Presidency Is Too Powerful. Congress Needs To Step Up.

    Read More

    Why Fed Independence Is a Cornerstone of Democracy—and Why It’s Under Threat
    1 U.S.A dollar banknotes
    Photo by Alexander Grey on Unsplash

    Why Fed Independence Is a Cornerstone of Democracy—and Why It’s Under Threat

    In an era of rising polarization and performative politics, few institutions remain as consequential and as poorly understood by citizens as the Federal Reserve.

    While headlines swirl around inflation, interest rates, and stock market reactions, the deeper story is often missed: the Fed’s independence is not just a technical matter of monetary policy. It’s a democratic safeguard.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    An oil drilling platform with a fracking rig.

    An oil drilling platform with a fracking rig extracts valuable resources from beneath the earth's surface.

    Getty Images, grandriver

    Trump Says America’s Oil Industry Is Cleaner Than Other Countries’. New Data Shows Massive Emissions From Texas Wells.

    Hakim Dermish moved to the small South Texas town of Catarina in 2002 in search of a rural lifestyle on a budget. The property where he lived with his wife didn’t have electricity or sewer lines at first, but that didn’t bother him.

    “Even if we lived in a cardboard box, no one could kick us out,” Dermish said.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
    Mount Rushmore
    Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

    Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

    No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

    No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

    Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

    Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

    The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

    As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

    Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

    Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

    And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

    But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

    This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

    Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

    Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

    Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

    On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

    The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

    Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    © Copyright 2025