A web search* of several state public school math standards and online textbooks and lesson plans showed that nowadays grade 8 seems to emphasize understanding the concept of irrational numbers and that they are out there. But not requiring proof (especially for "struggling learners", a descriptor that is a direct quote).
Of course, any time you say "are there any texts" the answer is probably yes (at least one exists). For example, when I learned the topic in middle school, we were shown the sqrt(2) proof. So, I'm sure there are some places still teaching that, even if it is deprecated a bit more now. The right question is probably not are there any, but how common is it. (If you just want a single example, try the AoPS pre-algebra text. But that book may be a bit harder than optimal, for average students...and is expensive.)
In some cases, from the search, it seems like the proof was mentioned as a concept (e.g. with the name of a Greek) but not demonstrated. It appears to be current thinking to not require the sqrt(2) demonstration. Which I don't really have a problem with, the whole point is to just introduce the concept. For what it's worth, I've probably never seen the proof that pi is irrational but just accepted it. After all, people like bragging about how many decimals they know and pi sure doesn't look rational for several decimals out so it probably is irrational and I'll accept it that someone proved it without me needing to see the details.
Note also that some numbers are STILL not proven as irrational, but we have been unable to express them as rational numbers! E.g. pi plus e. This despite, we know about where it is on the number line and it's even a rather simple expression, not some ugly continued fraction foul thingie. But if it is rational, it's got to be a very large denominator, since we haven't found it yet. Personally, I think this is kind of cool, now, knowing what irrationals are (maybe more like an engineer knows them, not like a Rudin-luvver, since I never took pure math), that there is this richness to the topic. But I wouldn't derail the initial learning about irrationals themselves with this complexity.
FWIW, with "high track" students (US G/T or German gymnasium), I would have no issue with showing the sqrt(2) proof still. They can handle it. But maybe not with the middle/struggling tracks. Just follow the modern practice to "not require proof" (an actual quote from one standard) And even for the G/T track, I wouldn't go so far as to say "proof needed" being the emphasis. The emphasis is more conceptual, even for the good students (knowing the concept of can't be a rational fraction or expressed in terminating/repeating decimal). Just the proof is a nice flourish to add and give them some more grounding.
*Source: user "guest", Google, APR2023. I can't show more than two links without getting spam blocked, but see these:
(example state standard) https://portal.ct.gov/SDE/CT-Core-Standards/Materials-for-Teachers/Mathematics/Math-Lesson-Plans/Math/Grade-8-Rational-and-Irrational-Numbers---Real-Number-Race
An interesting paper on the math ed aspect of student's first intro to irrationals: