Senate panel adopts resolution to rescind California's calls for an Article V constitutional convention
Loading...
Summary
The subcommittee adopted SJR 1, a joint resolution that would rescind California's prior calls for a federal constitutional convention under Article V; sponsors warned a convention could become a "runaway" event without constitutional guardrails, and supporters from the League of Women Voters and constitutional scholars testified in favor.
A Senate Judiciary subcommittee voted to adopt SJR 1, a resolution rescinding California's past calls for a federal constitutional convention under Article V, saying the state should not remain on record in favor of an open-ended process that could threaten civil liberties.
Senator Wiener, who introduced the resolution, argued that Article V provides no rules for how a convention would be run and said there is a real risk that a narrowly focused convention could morph into a broader slate of changes. "There are no rules in the Constitution about how the convention is convened, who decides who gets to be a delegate, whether they are or aren't constrained," Wiener said.
Dora Rose, deputy director of the League of Women Voters of California and a sponsor of SJR 1, told the committee that the League has long warned against the perils of an Article V convention. She said rescinding prior calls would help protect voting rights, reproductive rights, and other constitutional protections that could be at risk if a convention exceeded its original scope.
McKay Cunningham, a constitutional law professor testifying in support, said the legal questions about what counts as a valid state call and whether calls can be rescinded remain unsettled and that the uncertainty itself puts rights at risk.
No witnesses testified in opposition at the subcommittee. The motion to adopt SJR 1 passed on the committee roll call; the recorded tally was unanimous among members voting.
Why it matters: Article V of the U.S. Constitution allows states to call for a convention to propose amendments, but the Constitution does not specify procedural limits for such a convention. Proponents of SJR 1 argued that rescinding California's earlier calls reduces the risk that the state would be complicit in a convention that removes or curtails constitutional protections.
What's next: With subcommittee approval, SJR 1 proceeds through the Senate; sponsors urged immediate adoption to remove California from the list of active calls.
Votes at a glance: Committee roll call recorded the resolution adopted unanimously among members voting.
