By Alyssa Burr for the Michigan Independent.
Broadcast version by Chrystal Blair for Michigan News Connection reporting for the Michigan Independent-Public News Service Collaboration
A child’s education, the protection of the state’s air and water, and taxation: What do these all have in common? They’re all rights and liberties guaranteed to Michiganders under articles of the state constitution.
Those rights could be up for debate if a majority of Michigan voters approve Proposal 1, otherwise known as the “constitutional convention question,” in the November 2026 general election. Each of the last four times the constitutional convention question has appeared on the ballot, voters overwhelmingly rejected the measure. Most recently, in 2010, 66.6% of voters voted against the measure.
The Michigan Constitution has since 1978 required the state to present the question of holding a constitutional convention to voters every 16 years. Unlike the traditional ballot initiative process, which focuses on a single issue, a constitutional convention, sometimes referred to as a “Con-Con,” opens the door for delegates to propose sweeping changes to any of the 12 articles of the state constitution.
“It effectively gives the convention the ability to propose whatever changes they want to the constitution, including shredding it and starting over from scratch,” said Quinn Yeargain, a Michigan State University College of Law professor who specializes in constitutional law.
Yeargain said the articles that could be up for debate if a convention is approved widely depend on the individuals chosen to revise the Michigan Constitution. Within six months of passing the measure, voters would have to elect one delegate from each of the 110 state House of Representative districts and 38 state Senate districts to represent them at the gathering. The delegates would then convene in October 2027 to begin the convention. There is no set timeline for how long a constitutional convention must last, and there are no restrictions on issues delegates may consider.
While the convention is underway, voters don’t have a say over the changes delegates make. However, state law requires that voters, with a simple majority vote, choose whether to approve constitutional amendments the delegates propose within 90 days after the convention concludes.
While no issues would be off the table, Yeargain noted, the Michigan Constitution would still have to comply with the U.S. Constitution, meaning that any provision a convention adopted would only be enforceable if it aligned with federal law. For example, while the Michigan Constitution bans same-sex marriage, the Obergefell v. Hodges U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2015 that recognizes a constitutional right to marriage equality overrides the state’s ban.
Asked what issues he thought delegates might address at a potential convention, Yeargain said, “It’s a difficult question to answer, largely because it really seems as though it’s more conservative groups that are pushing a yes vote on the convention, and so part of that is pulling back on some of the expansion of rights and liberties in the Michigan Constitution.” Yeargain pointed to abortion rights as one example: A majority of Michigan voters approved Proposal 3 in the 2022 midterm election, which enshrined a person’s right to an abortion in the Michigan Constitution.
Republican House Speaker Matt Hall of Richland Township and Republican Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt of Porter Township have already publicly thrown their support behind the initiative to hold a constitutional convention.
The Michigan Advance reported in May 2025 that, during a panel at the annual Mackinac Policy Conference, Hall said he sees a Con-Con as an opportunity to remove provisions he said had been stuffed into the constitution. Nesbitt said he thinks it’s a good opportunity to make changes that the state government hasn’t had the “political courage” to take on.
“For the people who are urging a no vote, there hasn’t been much discussion as to what they would propose doing, largely because the second that you start getting into saying ‘Vote no, but if you vote yes, here’s what we’ll do’ then you’re effectively encouraging people to vote yes at that point,” Yeargain said.
Protect MI Constitution from Special Interests, a coalition of opposition groups advocating for a no vote on the Con-Con question, said holding one risks creating years of uncertainty for residents, and said the process could be influenced by outside, well-funded interest groups.
“While there’s room to update our state’s constitution, most issues can be addressed without reopening the entire document – and there’s no guarantee a convention would deliver better outcomes, particularly given out-of-state and special interest influence or sweeping, single-issue agendas that could stall investment and job growth in Michigan,” Wendy Block, a member of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce and of the coalition, said in a statement.
Michigan isn’t the only state with a constitutional convention provision; 13 other states automatically place the question on the ballot at given intervals. “No state has approved such a measure since Rhode Island in 1984,” Yeargain said. They noted the most recent high-profile campaign to try to get people to vote in favor of a constitutional convention was in Alaska in 2022; only 30% of Alaskans voted yes.
“I think the biggest risk is the risk of unknown, that I don’t know what the convention will be, who the convention delegates will be. … Given that there is that unknown, it’s effectively asking voters to open up Pandora’s box, and there’s no guarantee of what’s in it, because there are no safeguards,” Yeargain said.
Alyssa Burr wrote this article for the Michigan Independent.
Source: Public News Service
