Amendments Convention Called Under Article V of the U.S. Constitution - Delegation to the Convention
SB 886 establishes a Maryland framework for participating in an amendments convention called under Article V of the U.S. Constitution. If the required number of states triggers such a convention, the General Assembly must appoint a seven-member state delegation and a three-member advisory committee in the next regular legislative session. The bill defines the roles of commissioners, interim commissioners, and the advisory committee, and sets out how the delegation is selected, credentialed, compensated, and supervised.
The bill places detailed qualifications and restrictions on commissioners. Appointees must be Maryland residents and registered voters, meet age and citizenship requirements, and be free of recent federal lobbying, federal employment, federal elective or appointive office, and certain felony convictions. Commissioners must take an oath to follow their commission and instructions, may be recalled or removed, and are limited in the gifts and benefits they may accept. The delegation must also designate members to chair the delegation, cast the state’s vote, and speak to the media, while other commissioners are restricted from independently discussing convention business with the media.
SB 886 also limits the delegation’s authority. Commissioners may not support changing the traditional one-state, one-vote rule or any proposed amendment that would alter specified constitutional guarantees of individual liberty, including the Bill of Rights and several post-Civil War and voting-rights amendments. The delegation’s authority is further limited to the subject matter that triggered the convention, unless the General Assembly later issues additional instructions. The advisory committee is empowered to hire staff, monitor the convention, advise commissioners within 24 hours when asked, and determine whether a commissioner exceeded authority, with removal or suspension procedures tied to those determinations.
The bill would add a new subtitle to the State Government Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland and would create a state oversight structure for any future Article V convention participation. Its practical effect is to formalize how Maryland would select, instruct, monitor, and, if necessary, remove its convention delegates, while also codifying ethical and procedural limits on their conduct. It does not itself call a convention or change Maryland’s substantive constitutional law, but it would govern state participation if a convention is ever convened.
The overall sentiment reflected by the bill text is cautious and control-oriented rather than expansive. The measure appears designed to ensure legislative oversight, prevent delegate freelancing, and protect constitutional rights during any convention process. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the available context, but the bill’s detailed safeguards suggest that its sponsors anticipated concerns about delegate authority, convention scope, and the risk of unintended constitutional changes.
SB 886 would add new provisions to the Maryland Code creating Subtitle 18, “Oversight of Delegation to Amendments Convention,” in the State Government Article. It would require the General Assembly to appoint a convention delegation and advisory committee if an Article V amendments convention is triggered, and it would establish qualifications, compensation, oath, ethics rules, media restrictions, recall procedures, and authority limits for commissioners. The bill also authorizes the advisory committee to monitor the convention, issue rapid advisory determinations, and remove or suspend commissioners who exceed their authority.
No committee testimony or vote history is provided, so there is no recorded public debate to measure directly. Based on the bill’s structure, the measure reflects a cautious and supervisory approach to Article V convention participation, emphasizing legislative control, delegate discipline, and protection of constitutional guarantees. The tone of the legislation suggests concern about preventing unauthorized action by delegates rather than enthusiasm for broad convention authority.
The main points of contention implied by the bill are the scope of delegate authority, the ability of Maryland delegates to bind the state, and whether a convention could alter core constitutional protections. The bill addresses these concerns by limiting commissioners to the subject matter of the triggering applications, barring support for changes to the one-state, one-vote rule, and prohibiting votes for amendments that would alter specified liberty guarantees. Another likely area of concern is the advisory committee’s power to recall, suspend, or remove commissioners, including when the General Assembly is not in session, which centralizes control over the delegation in legislative leadership.