Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sr23 Article V topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers debate Article V convention and Georgia delegate-limitation safeguards
Summary
A sponsor introduced Senate Resolution 23 to propose an Article V convention limited to congressional term limits; members questioned the historical precedent, legal review and whether state delegate-limitation laws would prevent a 'runaway' convention, with the sponsor saying no Supreme Court case directly governs an Article V convention.
A lawmaker introduced Senate Resolution 23, describing it as a proposal for an Article V convention limited to congressional term limits. The sponsor said the resolution would send delegates constrained by Georgia’s existing delegate-limitation law.
"It takes three-fourths of the states to propose an amendment convention — so that would take 34 states — and then it would have to be ratified by 38 states," the sponsor said, describing the two-step process of proposal and ratification.
Members pressed the sponsor about historical precedent and legal risk. One member asked whether the only historical precedent was the 1787 Philadelphia convention, which that questioner suggested had become a 'runaway convention.' The sponsor replied that the Philadelphia meeting reworked the Articles of Confederation and was not the same as an Article V amendment convention and said there is no Supreme Court case testing state constraints on delegate behavior.
The sponsor emphasized Georgia's 2014 delegate-limitation act, saying that under state law a delegate who violates instructions could be recalled or prosecuted and that Georgia law requires delegates to follow the General Assembly's instructions.
Members raised concerns about how other states handle delegate limits; the sponsor said many states have taken similar steps and offered to provide the relevant code section.
The discussion ended without a final committee vote on SR23 in the portion of the transcript provided; members were left debating legal uncertainty and historical analogies.
What happens next: The transcript records discussion and questions; the sponsor offered follow-up material (code citations) but no final committee action on SR23 is recorded in the excerpt.
