Texas Senate Bill SB1639

Texas 2013 - 83rd Regular

Caption

Relating to the application of foreign laws and foreign forum selection in certain family law proceedings.

Impact

If passed, SB1639 would significantly modify the way Texas courts handle cases involving foreign law. The bill asserts that any contract provision demanding the application of foreign law in family matters would be void unless the foreign law guarantees the same constitutional rights found in the U.S. Constitution. This could lead to a re-evaluation of existing agreements and practices in family law, potentially affecting many couples and families who currently engage with foreign legal systems. Additionally, the bill affirms that Texas courts cannot decline jurisdiction based on a foreign tribunal being a more convenient forum if it doesn't uphold these fundamental rights, thus reinforcing state jurisdiction in family matters.

Summary

Senate Bill 1639 aims to restrict the application of foreign laws in family law proceedings within Texas. Specifically, it prohibits Texas courts from enforcing foreign laws if such enforcement would undermine the fundamental rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution. This includes statutes related to the dissolution of marriage and other issues concerning the parent-child relationship. By establishing these limitations, the bill seeks to ensure that all legal proceedings remain within the framework of U.S. constitutional protections, safeguarding individual rights in family law contexts.

Contention

The introduction of SB1639 has sparked discussions around its implications for international agreements and how families with transnational ties engage with the legal system. Critics may argue that the bill could jeopardize the enforceability of valid legal contracts made under foreign jurisdictions, especially for those who require adjudication under laws that differ from Texas law. Supporters contend that it clarifies and strengthens the rights of Texas residents against laws that may not align with American legal principles, though it raises questions about potential conflicts in legal jurisdiction and international law relationships.