According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), the fiscal implications of HB 2350 are minimal for both the state and local governments. According to the Legislative Budget Board’s fiscal note, the bill is not expected to result in any significant cost to the state. It is assumed that any administrative adjustments or additional responsibilities imposed by the bill—such as changes in court procedures or increased filings due to adjusted standing rules—could be managed within existing agency resources​.

Specifically, the Office of Court Administration and the Department of Family and Protective Services, which are among the primary agencies potentially affected, anticipate no significant fiscal impact from the bill’s implementation. This suggests that while the bill may lead to some changes in the way suits affecting the parent-child relationship are initiated and processed, those changes are not expected to cause substantial administrative burden or necessitate new funding.

Similarly, for local governments, including trial courts and child welfare offices, the fiscal note indicates no significant financial effect. This implies that any increase or decrease in case volume resulting from the bill’s redefinition of standing would be manageable with current personnel and operational capacity. Overall, HB 2350 is designed to clarify legal standing without expanding government operations or expenditures.

HB 2350 makes meaningful and responsible reforms to Texas Family Code provisions governing who may file suits affecting the parent-child relationship. The bill tightens legal standing for non-parent caregivers by requiring “exclusive” rather than “actual” care of a child, ensuring that only those with a clearly defined and committed caregiving role can initiate such cases. At the same time, it expands standing for extended family members by allowing relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity—such as great-aunts/uncles or second cousins—to file suit when both parents are deceased. These reforms advance the principles of personal responsibility, limited government, and individual liberty, ensuring that only those with a legitimate and substantial interest in a child's welfare can engage the judicial system.

Critically, the bill maintains a limited-government approach. It does not create new agencies, expand government power, or impose any regulatory burdens on individuals or businesses. The Legislative Budget Board has confirmed that the bill carries no significant fiscal implications to the state or local governments, and any procedural changes can be absorbed by existing resources​. The bill also promotes efficiency and consistency within the court system by codifying clearer and more objective standards for standing.

However, while the bill aligns well with core liberty principles, there are a few provisions that could benefit from clarification or modest revision. For example, eliminating standing for those who lived with the child and a now-deceased parent could exclude individuals with significant and meaningful relationships. Similarly, the removal of standing for adults with substantial past contact in adoption or termination cases may limit courts’ flexibility in child protection scenarios. Addressing these edge cases with narrowly tailored amendments would strengthen the bill’s fidelity to individual liberty without undermining its structure.

The bill upholds liberty by limiting government interference, focusing legal access on those most directly responsible for a child, and ensuring due process in sensitive family matters. While our support is not contingent on the adoption of the recommended changes, such amendments would further improve the legislation's clarity and effectiveness. Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES; Amend on HB 2350.

• The bill refines who has the legal right (standing) to file a lawsuit concerning a child’s custody or welfare. It protects the rights of biological and legal parents by raising the standard for non-parent caregivers to gain standing—requiring exclusive rather than merely actual care. This change helps shield families from unnecessary or disruptive litigation by distant individuals. At the same time, it supports children’s welfare by expanding standing to more extended relatives in cases where both parents are deceased. However, by removing standing for certain individuals with meaningful relationships—such as those who lived with a now-deceased parent—it could, in rare cases, restrict individual liberty to act in a child's best interest.
• The bill raises the bar for non-parent caregivers by requiring a demonstrated, consistent, and exclusive caregiving role before legal standing is granted. This promotes accountability and deters casual or opportunistic claims from those who lack a genuine commitment to the child’s care. It also continues to recognize the rights of foster parents and designated caregivers who have assumed formal responsibilities through Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) placements.
• The bill does not regulate or interfere with business or economic activity. It does not impose any new restrictions on private enterprise or the legal industry. Its focus is entirely within the domain of family law and judicial process.
• Though the bill does not directly affect property, it does reinforce the sanctity of the family unit as a domain of personal autonomy. By limiting who may petition courts regarding a child, it respects the private decision-making authority of families unless a strong, demonstrable interest by another party exists.
• The bill aligns with a limited-government philosophy by tightening legal access to family courts, thus reducing the likelihood of unnecessary or intrusive state involvement in family matters. It does not grow state authority, expand programs, or impose new obligations on government agencies. Additionally, it is fiscally neutral and does not require new resources to implement, as confirmed by the Legislative Budget Board​.