Utah House sides with delay after lengthy debate over rescinding state—s call for constitutional convention

The Utah House of Representatives spent more than two hours debating House Joint Resolution 14, a proposal to rescind the state—s prior call for a federal constitutional convention, before voting to circle — effectively postpone — the measure to allow additional testimony, including from U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch.

Representative Jay Reese Hunter, the bill—s sponsor, argued the resolution should be amended to make clear the House is formally rescinding and withdrawing Utah—s earlier application for a constitutional convention. Hunter told colleagues he had compiled legal opinions and scholarly statements — from sources including former U.S. Supreme Court justices and constitutional scholars — saying a federal convention cannot be effectively limited to a single subject and therefore poses a real risk of sweeping, unintended change. "We are on the brink of possible disaster," Hunter said, arguing rescission would protect the Constitution.

Opponents urged caution. Representative Wadda and others said rescinding the call would send the wrong message to Congress and could undermine efforts to secure a balanced-budget amendment through federal channels. Several representatives raised concerns about an organized letter-writing campaign they described as one-sided and some said they had received dozens of near-identical letters from constituents. Representative Stevens said many of the letters appeared to be organized through schools and criticized what she called an inappropriate mobilization of students.

During floor debate the House adopted a substitute version of HJR 14 and approved at least one textual amendment clarifying that the prior application was "rescinded, repealed and withdrawn." Despite adopting amendments, members ultimately voted to circle the resolution so that additional speakers could be scheduled and Sen. Orrin Hatch could address the chamber. Representative Goodfellow, speaking for those who supported the delay, said circling the bill would give both sides an opportunity to present further evidence.

The House did not adopt or reject the rescission on the floor; by circling the bill lawmakers postponed a final decision and instructed staff to schedule further consideration. The immediate next step is procedural: a time-certain and witnesses will be arranged, with the sponsor and House leadership coordinating scheduling and invitations.

The debate touched legal and political issues: whether Article V of the U.S. Constitution allows a convention to be limited to a single topic, the risk of a "runaway" convention, and the strategic impact rescission might have on efforts to secure a federal balanced-budget amendment. Sponsors relied on submitted memoranda and letters from legal scholars; opponents emphasized constituent pressure and the potential for Congress to act without state convention calls. The resolution was circled for future consideration.