Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sb120 Convention Delegates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Long hearing on SB 120 pits proponents who say it prevents 'runaway' Article V conventions against opponents who warn of constitutional risk
Summary
At a lengthy hearing on SB 120, proponents argued the bill would create selection, oath and recall mechanisms to limit a state’s delegates to an Article V convention; opponents said Congress and federal processes make such constraints ineffective and risky. The committee took testimony from multiple proponents and opponents and asked technical questions about rules and recall authority.
Senate Bill 120, which would establish rules for selecting, supervising and potentially recalling Montana commissioners to an Article V convention, drew a wide array of testimony during a lengthy committee hearing.
Sponsor Senator McGillivray framed the bill as procedural guardrails: it sets commissioner qualifications, an odd-numbered delegation, an advisory committee that can recall delegates who exceed their instructions, and an oath limiting commissioners to the state's application. Proponents emphasized that the bill would let the state instruct and, if necessary, replace delegates who stray from the legislative application.
Eric Hogehog, a proponent, told the committee, "SB 120 is a forward thinking bill that gives this state and its people some control over any future convention of states." Other proponents — including Karen Hogehog, Sharon Jensen, Doug Kary and experienced constitutional litigator Mike Ferris — argued that clear selection rules and recall authority are prudent preparations if a multistate application reaches the 34-state threshold.
Opponents raised constitutional doubts and practical concerns about relying on state law to constrain a national convention called by Congress. Fred Geiser said the bill "provides nothing more than a false sense of security," and former legislator Scott Sales warned that litigation over such statutes is likely and could be costly. Joan Kresich of the Northern Plains Resource Council argued commissioners should be elected by Montanans rather than appointed by lawmakers.
Committee members pressed both proponents and counsel on whether rules historically used by conventions could be enforced and whether recall is legally available. Sponsor McGillivray cited precedent and a 2020 case (Shafala v. Washington) to argue states have recalled delegates in other contexts; opponents maintained that Congress's role in calling a convention and the uncertainty of implementing legislation make practical control uncertain.
Why it matters: SB 120 would create state-level mechanics to direct Montana's delegates to an Article V convention. If a convention were called by Congress, proponents said these rules limit risk; opponents said they could be ineffective or invite legal challenges.
Next steps: The hearing concluded without a committee vote on SB 120 during this session; committee members indicated they would consider the legal questions raised and monitor related House resolutions and applications.
