Read the full stored bill text
SB1328 - 572R - S Ver
Senate Engrossed
domestic relations;
parents' rights
State of Arizona
Senate
Fifty-seventh Legislature
Second Regular Session
2026
SENATE BILL 1328
AN
ACT
amending section 25-103, arizona
revised statutes; relating to domestic relations.
(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
Be it
enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Section 25-103, Arizona Revised
Statutes, is amended to read:
START_STATUTE
25-103.
Purposes of title; application of title
A. It is declared that the public policy of this
state and the general purposes of this title are:
1. To promote strong families
.
;
2. To promote strong family values.
3. To protect and promote parents'
rights as prescribed in section 1-601.
4. To protect and promote the
parents' bill of rights as prescribed in section 1-602.
B. It also is the declared public policy of this
state and the general purpose of this title that
,
absent
evidence to the contrary, it is in a child's best interest:
1. To have substantial, frequent, meaningful and
continuing parenting time with both parents.
2. To have both parents participate in
decision-making about the child.
3. That a child has a right to equal
access to both co-parents.
C. A court shall apply the provisions of this title
in a manner that is consistent with this section.
END_STATUTE
Sec. 2.
Legislative intent
The State of Arizona recognizes that:
1. Parental rights pursuant
to section 1-601, Arizona Revised Statutes, and children's constitutional
rights to family integrity under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause
protect the family unit from unwarranted state interference.
2. The right to unwarranted
state interference is reciprocal to parents' fundamental rights to the care,
custody and control of their children, as established in landmark Supreme Court
cases such as
Meyer v. Nebraska
262 (U.S. 390, 43 S. Ct. 625, 1923),
Pierce
v. Society of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary
(268 U.S.
390, 43 S. Ct. 625, 1925),
Stanley v. Illinois
(405 U.S. 510, 92 S. Ct.
1208, 1972),
Santosky v. Kramer
(455 U.S. 745, 102 S. Ct. 1388, 1982)
and
Troxel v. Granville
(520 U.S. 57, 120 S. Ct. 2054, 2000).
3. Federal circuit courts
have affirmed rights for children in dependency proceedings, including in
Duchesne
v. Sugarman
(566 F.2nd 817, 1977),
Wallis v. Spencer
(202 F.3d 1126,
2000) and
Jordan v. Jackson
(876 A.2d 443, 2005).
4. While existing
jurisprudence asserts these rights and focuses on preventing unjust separation
from the family as a whole and does not extend to a child's civil or
constitutional right to equal access, it is the public policy of the State of
Arizona that it does.
5. It is the policy of the
State of Arizona that the "best interest of the child" standard
prioritizes the child's welfare over any presumption of equality to either
parent and to achieve that standard, family courts must recognize presumptions
favoring shared parenting, unless evidence shows otherwise.