Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Federal Lands topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House Energy endorses joint resolution supporting Utah’s constitutional question on federal land

2813609 · March 28, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The committee voted 8-6 to pass House Joint Resolution 25, a resolution supporting Utah’s petition on a constitutional question related to federal lands and jurisdiction; members debated legal precedent and whether the resolution implied land transfer.

Representative (unnamed on record) moved that House Joint Resolution 25 do pass; members debated whether the resolution was a narrow request to get a constitutional question answered or an attempt at land transfer.

Representative Millett provided historical context when asked about the Seventeenth Amendment: "The seventeenth amendment was ratified in 1913," she said. Representative Griffith urged caution on the legal basis and cited existing case law, referencing a case she called "Clappy versus New Mexico," and argued Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 constrains the remedy Utah seeks. Griffith said she had done legal research and did not believe the complaint was clearly supportable, but she ultimately said she would vote yes to spur conversation.

Other members framed the resolution as a statement supporting Utah’s request to have a constitutional question resolved, not as immediate land transfer. "This is just a statement by the state of Montana saying, look we're gonna try to fix this problem we're gonna do our part So I do recommend that you do pass," one member said.

The committee recorded a roll-call vote of 8 ayes and 6 noes; HJR 25 moves to the floor.

Why it matters: The resolution expresses Montana's support for Utah's petition to resolve a constitutional question about federal jurisdiction and the status of federal lands. Members split over the merits and legal foundation, and some said opponents feared the resolution could presage land transfers—even though proponents described it as a request for judicial clarification.

Votes at a glance: House Joint Resolution 25 — passed, 8-6; moves to the House floor.