On Motion To Certify a Question of Great Public Importance.
We grant the motion to certify a question of great public importance. The constitutionality of the 2014 amendment to section 39.806(1)(f), Florida Statutes, affects fundamental parental interests. Before issuance of our opinion in this case, no court has directly addressed the constitutionality of the statute, although some have questioned it. See In Interest of C.M.H., 288 So. 3d 722, 724 n.4 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018); J.F. v. Dept of Child. & Fams., 198 So. 3d 706, 707 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016).
The supreme court has discretionary jurisdiction to review decisions of the district courts which expressly declare a statute constitutional. Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(a)(2)(A)(i). The majority decision declares the amendment valid. In addition, we certify the following question to the supreme court:
DOES THE 2014 AMENDMENT TO SECTION 39.806(1)(f), FLORIDA STATUTES, WHICH PROVIDES THAT NO PROOF OF NEXUS BETWEEN EGREGIOUS CONDUCT TOWARDS ONE CHILD IS REQUIRED TO TERMINATE THE PARENTAL RIGHTS OF THE CHILDS SIBLINGS, UNCONSTITUTIONALLY REMOVE THE STATES BURDEN TO PROVE THAT THE EGREGIOUS CONDUCT POSES A SUBSTANTIAL RISK OF HARM TO EACH SIBLING AND IS THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS OF PROTECTING THE SIBLING(S) FROM SERIOUS HARM?
PER CURIAM.
Conner, C.J., Warner and Forst, JJ., concur.