IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1376 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the primary safeguard for the well-being and protection of children is the family, and 

that the primary safeguards for the legal rights of children in the 

United States are the Constitutions of the United States and the several 

States, and that, because the use of international treaties to govern 

policy in the United States on families and children is contrary to 

principles of self-government and federalism, and that, because the 

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child undermines traditional principles of law in the United States regarding parents and 

children, the President should not transmit the Convention to the Senate 

for its advice and consent. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 19, 2010 

Mr. HOEKSTRA submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

the primary safeguard for the well-being and protection 

of children is the family, and that the primary safeguards 

for the legal rights of children in the United States 

are the Constitutions of the United States and the several States, and that, because the use of international 

treaties to govern policy in the United States on families 

and children is contrary to principles of self-government 

and federalism, and that, because the United Nations 

Convention on the Rights of the Child undermines tradiVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:18 May 20, 2010 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6652 E:\BILLS\HR1376.IH HR1376

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1376 IH 

tional principles of law in the United States regarding 

parents and children, the President should not transmit 

the Convention to the Senate for its advice and consent. 

Whereas the House of Representatives affirms the commitment of the people and the Government of the United 

States to the well-being, protection, and advancement of 

children, and the protection of the inalienable rights of 

all persons of all ages; 

Whereas the Constitution and laws of the United States and 

those of the several States are the best guarantees 

against mistreatment of children in this Nation; 

Whereas the Constitution, laws, and traditions of the United 

States affirm the rights of parents to raise their children 

and to impart their values and religious beliefs; 

Whereas the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the 

Child, adopted at New York November 20, 1989, and entered into force September 2, 1990, if ratified, would become a part of the supreme law of the land, taking precedence over all State laws and constitutions; 

Whereas the United States, and not the several States, would 

be held responsible for compliance with this Convention 

if ratified, and as a consequence, the United States would 

create an incredible expansion of subject matter jurisdiction over all matters concerning children, seriously undermining the constitutional balance between the Federal 

Government and the governments of the several States; 

Whereas Professor Geraldine Van Bueren, the author of the 

principal textbook on the international rights of the child, 

and a participant in the drafting of the Convention, has 

described the ‘‘best interest of the child standard’’ in the 

treaty as ‘‘provid[ing] decision and policy makers with 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 1376 IH 

the authority to substitute their own decisions for either 

the child’s or the parents’’; 

Whereas the Scottish Government has issued a pamphlet to 

children of that country explaining their rights under the 

Convention, which declares that children have the right 

to decide their own religion and that parents can only 

provide advice; 

Whereas the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the 

Child has repeatedly interpreted the Convention to ban 

common disciplinary measures utilized by parents; 

Whereas the Government of the United Kingdom was found 

to be in violation of the Convention by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child for allowing 

parents to exercise a right to opt their children out of sex 

education courses in the public schools without a prior 

government review of the wishes of the child; 

Whereas the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the 

Child has held that the Governments of Indonesia and 

Egypt were out of compliance with the Convention because military expenditures were given inappropriate priority over children’s programs; 

Whereas these and many other interpretations of the Convention by those charged with its implementation and by 

other authoritative supporters demonstrates that the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights 

of the Child are utterly contrary to the principles of law 

in the United States and the inherent principles of freedom; 

Whereas the decisions and interpretations of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child would be considered by the Committee to be binding and authoritative 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
4 

•HRES 1376 IH 

upon the United States should the United States Government ratify the Convention, such that the Convention 

poses a threat to the sovereign rights of the United 

States and the several States to make final determinations regarding domestic law; and 

Whereas the proposition that the United States should be 

governed by international legal standards in its domestic 

policy is tantamount to proclaiming that the Congress of 

the United States and the legislatures of the several 

States are incompetent to draft domestic laws that are 

necessary for the proper protection of children, an assertion that is not only an affront to self-government but an 

inappropriate attack on the capability of legislators in the 

United States: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that— 

3 (1) the United Nations Convention on the 

4 Rights of the Child, adopted at New York November 

5 20, 1989, and entered into force September 2, 1990, 

6 is incompatible with the Constitution, the laws, and 

7 the traditions of the United States; 

8 (2) the Convention would undermine proper 

9 presumptions of freedom and independence for fami10 lies in the United States, supplanting those prin11 ciples with a presumption in favor of governmental 

12 intervention without the necessity for proving harm 

13 or wrong-doing; 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
5 

•HRES 1376 IH 

1 (3) the Convention would interfere with the 

2 principles of sovereignty, independence, and self-gov3 ernment in the United States that preclude the ne4 cessity or propriety of adopting international law to 

5 govern domestic matters; and 

6 (4) the President should not transmit the Con7 vention to the Senate for its advice and consent. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS