Pillar A · Foundations
Life, Family, and Parental Rights
“Life begins at conception, and the Constitution protects it.”
Signature FightParenting is a fundamental right subject to strict scrutiny. Fit mothers and fit fathers stand equal under the law. Our signature legislative fight is comprehensive family court reform.
Where I stand
- Defend South Dakota's pro-life laws. Life begins at conception.
- Codify parental rights with strict-scrutiny review.
- Finish Shared Parenting. SB 172 (2025, Sen. Pischke) passed the Senate 20-13 and then failed the House 35-34 on March 10, 2025. One vote short. Both of District 32's seated representatives voted no. SB 224 (2026, Sen. Pischke) passed the Senate 20-14. HB 1067 (2026, Rep. Andera) carried the same fight on the House side. The 2027 session has to be the one that gets it over the line. South Dakota becomes the 7th state with a Shared Parenting presumption, after Kentucky, Arkansas, West Virginia, Florida, Missouri, and Mississippi (HB 1662, effective July 1, 2026).
- Bring back SB 190. The 2026 Rights of a Parent bill (Sen. Tamara Grove, R-Lower Brule) passed the Senate 19-15 and died in the House 30-35 on March 3, 2026. Thirty Republicans voted against it. We rewrite it tighter, address the abuse-investigation concerns critics raised, and pass it.
- Pass the 11-bill Martin Family Court Reform Stack in the 2027 session.
The signature legislation
This pillar carries the centerpiece of the campaign: the 11-bill Martin Family Court Reform Stack, ready to be filed in the 2027 session.
Pushback, answered
The hard questions, answered straight.
These are the real objections this position gets, with the same answers Zac gives in person. No talking points. No dodges.
“Shared parenting sounds nice, but what about cases where one parent is abusive?”
That is exactly why I support a rebuttable presumption, not an absolute mandate. A rebuttable presumption means the starting point is shared parenting, and the court must have specific evidence to deviate. Abuse, neglect, substance abuse, and documented danger to the child are all grounds to rebut the presumption. What shared parenting prevents is the opposite situation, where a fit parent is cut out of their child's life with no real evidence of harm.
“You sound like a men's rights advocate. Isn't this anti-woman?”
Fit mothers and fit fathers both benefit from shared parenting. The research shows children do better with both parents actively involved, regardless of which parent statistically tends to get primary custody under the current system. This is not a gender issue. It is a children issue and a fundamental fairness issue.
“Cameras in courtrooms will discourage victims of abuse from testifying.”
Genuine privacy protections will always apply to vulnerable witnesses, especially minor children and confirmed abuse victims. What public access protects against is judicial misconduct, inconsistent rulings, and the perception that family court operates by rules nobody can see. When family court decisions affect the rest of a child's life, the public has a right to see how those decisions are made.
“Mandatory timelines will rush important decisions.”
Family court cases currently drag on for years. Children grow up during those years. Parents lose homes, jobs, and savings during those years. Justice delayed is justice denied. Mandatory timelines force the system to prioritize the cases in front of it. Complex cases still have nine months, which is more than enough time if the court is actually working on it.
“False allegations are rare. Why are you focused on that instead of real abuse?”
False allegations and real abuse are both serious problems, and treating one seriously does not mean ignoring the other. Real abuse victims are best protected by a system that takes allegations seriously with real investigation. When there are no consequences for false allegations, the system is flooded with claims that cannot be distinguished from real ones, and that hurts real victims most of all.
“Judicial accountability sounds like attacking judges. Are you politicizing the courts?”
Every other branch of government has accountability mechanisms. Voters choose legislators. Executives answer to the public. Courts are supposed to be guided by law and precedent, not judicial whim. When a judge has enormous discretion over the most personal and painful decisions families can face, the public has a right to expect accountability, transparency, and consistency.
“You have personal history with family court. Isn't this just grievance politics?”
I learned about this system the hard way, and I will not pretend I did not. But grievance would be running for office to settle scores. I am running because what happened in my life happens to thousands of South Dakota families every year, and I refuse to pretend it is fine. Personal experience is how most people become the experts they are.
“Mandatory paternity tests sound invasive. Why require them for everyone?”
Mandatory paternity testing protects everyone. It protects fathers who have been fraudulently put on birth certificates. It protects children who have a right to know their biological origins. It protects mothers from accusations of dishonesty. It protects the child support system from being built on false assumptions. One test at birth solves problems that can otherwise take decades and millions of dollars to untangle.
“Eleven bills is too ambitious. Pick one and focus.”
The current system is broken in eleven ways. Fixing one while leaving the others broken just shifts the pressure somewhere else. A comprehensive package is actually more achievable than a series of one-off bills, because each reform reinforces the others. Every single one of these bills has model legislation and national precedent behind it.
“Pro-life and pro-parental rights sound like code words for controlling women.”
Every word of my platform is about protecting children, protecting parents, and protecting families. Mothers are parents. Women who want their children to have present fathers are the biggest beneficiaries of shared parenting. Women who want to be the primary decision-makers for their children's health, education, and faith are the biggest beneficiaries of strong parental rights. This platform protects women.