Vermonters will vote on equal protection amendment to state constitution this fall

Vermont voters will have the chance to weigh in on another amendment to the state’s constitution this fall.

The proposal, which got a final sign-off from the House on Wednesday, is aimed at ensuring all people are treated equally under the law regardless of their race, ethnicity, sex, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or nationality.

A statewide vote is the last step in the yearslong process that PR.4, or any other proposed change to Vermont’s founding document, must follow. The Senate, where the measure was first proposed nearly a decade ago, gave its final sign-off to the amendment in March.

Supporters say the proposal builds on the equal protection clause in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, in part by explicitly identifying groups of people who have historically faced discrimination in Vermont and around the country.

If approved, the measure — a similar version of which exists in a majority of other state constitutions — could form the basis of future Vermont Supreme Court decisions, supporters have said. It would become the 23rd article of Vermont’s founding document.

“The federal Constitution represents a floor, not a ceiling, of rights. It shows us the minimum we can do, not the maximum,” said Rep. Barbara Rachelson, D/P-Burlington, presenting PR.4 on the House floor Wednesday. “Therefore, it’s important that Vermont develop its own jurisprudence regarding equal protection, and not simply rely on the one found in our federal Constitution.”

The proposal got near-unanimous support on the House and Senate floors, though it faced more opposition this year than when it got initial approval from both chambers in 2024. In Vermont, proposed constitutional amendments need to win support from back-to-back legislatures before going to voters.

In the House this week, the proposal passed 128-14. Two years ago, it passed the chamber with just four votes against. All but one of the House members who voted against PR.4 this year are Republicans. There are more GOP members in the House today than there were two years ago.

The “no” votes Wednesday included the vice chair of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Tom Burditt, R-West Rutland, whose committee reviewed the proposal before advancing it to the floor. Also voting against were Rep. Mark Higley, R-Lowell, who is the House’s assistant minority leader, and Rep. Zak Harvey, R-Castleton, who is the vice chair of the state Republican Party.

Just one GOP member offered an explanation on the floor while voting no: Val Taylor of Mendon, who framed her opposition to the proposal in religious terms.

“I believe in my heart — and, I’m sorry — the only words that are going to change Vermont and change this world, I believe, come from the Bible, and I think that is what’s lacking in the world,” said Taylor, who is the top Republican on the House Health Care Committee. “True love, peace — how I raise my girls — comes from the Bible.”

No senators voted against PR.4 in March, nor did any vote against it in 2024.

One senator, however, was not in the chamber for the vote this year. That was Sen. Steve Heffernan, R-Addison, who got up from his seat right before the roll call vote was taken.

Heffernan told VTDigger at the time that he left because his stomach was feeling “agitated” and he needed to use the restroom. He said he had not made up his mind on how to vote on the amendment, largely because he’d heard from constituents urging him both to vote for and against it.

“My pizza hit at the right time, I guess,” he said, calling the timing “convenient.” Voters will be able to weigh in on PR.4 during this fall’s general election, which is Nov. 3. The proposal needs a majority vote to pass.

If approved, it would be the third change to the state constitution in the past four years. In 2022, voters passed amendments explicitly prohibiting slavery and indentured servitude under the state constitution and, broadly, preventing the state from interfering in reproductive health care decisions.

This story was originally published by VTDigger and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.