Vermonters are likely to see Proposal 4 (PR.4) on the November ballot. The proposal would add a new Article 23 to the Vermont Constitution guaranteeing equal protection under the law. On its face, it reads like a straightforward anti-discrimination amendment.
But Vermont already has an equality clause. For more than 250 years, Article 7 — known as the Common Benefits Clause — has served as the state’s constitutional protection against unequal treatment.
Understanding PR.4 requires understanding what Article 7 already does — and what PR.4 would add.
The Existing Equality Clause: Article 7
Article 7 states that government is instituted for the “common benefit” of the people and not for the “particular emolument or advantage of any single person, family, or set of persons.”
That language dates to 1777. Vermont courts have used it as the state’s functional equal protection doctrine. It has been the basis for reviewing discrimination claims, evaluating unequal classifications, and in some cases applying heightened scrutiny. It was central, for example, in the Vermont Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage decision in Baker v. State.
In other words, Vermont has not lacked constitutional equality language. Article 7 has been the vehicle for it for centuries.
Supporters of PR.4 have not argued that Article 7 failed to protect civil rights. Rather, legislative testimony indicates a different concern: Article 7 does not explicitly protect identity-conscious remedial programs from challenge, particularly in light of recent federal court decisions limiting race-conscious affirmative action.
That distinction matters.
🍁 Make a One-Time Contribution — Stand Up for Accountability in Vermont 🍁
What PR.4 Would Add
PR.4 creates a new Article 23 stating:
- “The people are guaranteed equal protection under the law.”
- “The State shall not deny equal treatment under the law” based on race, ethnicity, sex, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or national origin.
Then comes the key provision:
“Nothing in this Article shall be interpreted or applied to prevent the adoption or implementation of measures intended to provide equality of treatment and opportunity for members of groups that have historically been subject to discrimination.”
This savings clause is the structural hinge of the amendment.
What the Savings Clause Changes
The clause prevents the new equality article from being used to invalidate programs the State characterizes as remedial measures for historically discriminated groups.
The amendment does not define those groups, but the enumerated categories provide strong guidance:
- Racial and ethnic minorities, including Black and Indigenous communities such as the Abenaki
- Women
- Religious minorities
- Individuals with disabilities
- LGBTQ Vermonters
- Individuals of certain national origins
The clause is open-ended and not limited to those categories.
Under PR.4, identity-conscious programs framed as remedying historical discrimination would have explicit constitutional backing under Vermont law.
What Legislative Testimony Reveals
During Senate Judiciary hearings, witnesses discussed protecting existing and future equity initiatives. Programs such as the Land Access Opportunity Board and the Health Equity Advisory Commission were referenced. Witnesses spoke about responding to recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions narrowing affirmative action and ensuring Vermont retained the ability to implement race-conscious and other identity-conscious measures.
The savings clause directly addresses those concerns. It ensures that the new equal protection article itself cannot be used to strike down such programs.
Possible Outcomes if Adopted
If PR.4 becomes part of the Constitution, it would not change day-to-day governance overnight. But it would alter the constitutional terrain.
Possible consequences include:
- Providing stronger state constitutional footing for race-conscious grant programs or contract set-asides.
- Supporting targeted funding initiatives designed to address historical disparities in housing, land access, education, or healthcare.
- Bolstering advisory boards and commissions focused on racial or identity-based equity.
- Offering constitutional grounding for proposals such as reparations or compensation programs framed as addressing historical discrimination.
- Narrowing the scope of state constitutional challenges to identity-conscious policies, shifting more disputes into federal court.
In short, Article 7 has operated as a general equality clause for centuries. PR.4 would overlay that framework with a new, explicit equal protection article that includes built-in protection for remedial identity-conscious measures.
Senators Who Sponsored Prop 4 Still In Office
How It Reaches the Ballot
Under Chapter II, Section 72 of the Vermont Constitution, amendments must pass the Legislature in two consecutive bienniums before going to voters.
In the first biennium (2023–2024), PR.4 was approved by a two-thirds vote of the Senate and a majority of the House.
In the current biennium (2025–2026), the proposal must be approved again — this time by a simple majority in both chambers — before it can be placed on the ballot.
According to the Senate Calendar dated February 24, 2026, the proposal is scheduled for third reading and action on the seventh legislative day commencing February 20, 2026. Under Senate Rule 83, that means the vote must occur on the seventh day the Senate is formally in session after that date.
If the Senate is operating on its typical Tuesday–Friday floor schedule, that places the final Senate vote in early March, likely during the first full week of March.
If a majority of Senators vote in favor, the proposal then moves to the House for second-biennium concurrence. If the House also approves it by majority vote, the amendment will be placed directly on the November 2026 general election ballot.
The Governor does not veto constitutional amendments. Once legislative concurrence is complete, the measure proceeds to voters for ratification.
Voters will see the operative language — including the savings clause.
The Question Before Voters
PR.4 does not replace Article 7. It supplements it.
The choice before voters is whether Vermont’s Constitution should continue relying solely on the broad common-benefit principle of Article 7, or whether it should add a new equality article that explicitly protects identity-conscious remedial programs from being invalidated under that equality clause.
That is the structural decision embedded in Proposal 4.
Dave Soulia | FYIVT
You can find FYIVT on YouTube | X(Twitter) | Facebook | Instagram
#fyivt #vtpoli #vermontconstitution #proposal4
Support Us for as Little as $5 – Get In The Fight!!
Make a Big Impact with $25/month—Become a Premium Supporter!
Join the Top Tier of Supporters with $50/month—Become a SUPER Supporter!
Subscribe to RSS
Leave a Reply