Vermont ballot measure · November 3, 2026
Vermont Proposal 4, explained
Equal protection under the law. A ballot measure is a yes-or-no question put directly to voters — no candidate is involved, and the wording on the ballot is the wording that becomes law. This page shows that wording first, then what it actually changes.
The official wordingWhat appears on the ballot. Everything below explains it.
Article 23. [Equality of rights] That the people are guaranteed equal protection under the law. The State shall not deny equal treatment under the law on account of a person's race, ethnicity, sex, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or national origin. 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.
What it actually means
Vermont's constitution, written in 1777, has no equal protection clause. Vermonters rely on the Fourteenth Amendment and on state statutes for protection against discrimination. Proposal 4 would add one: a guarantee of equal protection, a list of grounds on which the state may not deny equal treatment, and a third sentence making clear that measures intended to help groups historically subject to discrimination are not thereby forbidden. Thirty state constitutions already contain an equal rights provision; New York added one most recently, in 2024.
If you vote YES
- A new Article 23 would guarantee the people equal protection under the law as a matter of state constitutional right.
- The State could not deny equal treatment under the law on account of race, ethnicity, sex, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or national origin.
- A third sentence says nothing in the article prevents "measures intended to provide equality of treatment and opportunity for members of groups that have historically been subject to discrimination" — so remedial programmes would not be barred by it.
- Vermonters would be able to bring equal protection claims under the state constitution as well as the federal one, before Vermont courts.
- Vermont would join the 30 states whose constitutions contain an equal rights provision.
If you vote NO
- Vermont's constitution continues to contain no equal protection clause, and equal treatment claims rest on the Fourteenth Amendment and on Vermont's statutory anti-discrimination law.
- The Common Benefits Clause of Chapter I, Article 7 remains the closest state constitutional provision, and would continue to be the basis of state equality claims.
- Protection on the listed grounds continues to depend on statutes a future Legislature could change.
- No constitutional text would exist either way on whether remedial measures are permitted.
The numbers that matter
- State constitutions with an equal rights provision
- 30
- Legislative votes to refer
- Senate 28-0 and House 141-4 in 2024; Senate 29-0 and House 128-14 in 2026
- Age of Vermont's constitution
- Adopted 1777, with no equal protection clause
- Votes needed to pass
- A simple majority
Ballotpedia's survey; New York was the most recent to add one, in 2024
Vermont General Assembly; a proposal must pass in two consecutive bienniums
Vermont Constitution, Chapter I
Chapter II, Section 72, Vermont Constitution
What each side says3 for, 2 against — quoted, not summarised
Why supporters say YES
"Proposal 4 is the culmination of decades of advocacy, countless hours of testimony, and a broad consensus among Vermonters that equal protection under the law is not a partisan issue, it is a fundamental right."
— House Speaker Jill Krowinski (D, Chittenden-16)
"Proposal 4 is about constitutional clarity. It's about ensuring that equal protection under the law is explicit and also that it's enforceable."
— Rev. Mark Hughes, executive director, Vermont Racial Justice Alliance
"We are living at a time when we cannot take for granted that the legal and social gains made for equality based on sex or any other class will stand."
— Cary Brown, Vermont Commission on Women
Why opponents say NO
"The proposed Article 23 begins with language I strongly support: 'That the people are guaranteed equal protection under the law.' … my concern is not with any of the groups listed in the amendment. … It is a finite list and ambiguous third sentence that concerns me. … I do not believe our Constitution should be written in a way that appears to create different standards of equality for different groups. Equal protection should mean equal protection for every Vermonter."
— State Rep. Michael Boutin (R, Washington-3)
"This is very much part of a cultural zeitgeist that is currently falling out of vogue, and that not many people are really subscribing to."
— State Rep. Zachary Harvey (R, Rutland-3)
What's genuinely uncertain
- The central disagreement is textual: whether a list of protected grounds plus a savings clause for remedial measures strengthens equal protection or creates, as Rep. Boutin argues, different standards for different groups. That reading would be settled by courts.
- What the third sentence permits in practice — which "measures intended to provide equality of treatment and opportunity" survive — is not defined and has no Vermont precedent.
- Whether anything omitted from the list, such as age or economic status, would be protected by the opening sentence alone is not answered by the text.
- A committee, No on Proposal 4, registered in opposition; no contribution totals for either side were reported in the filings covering through September 1, 2026.
- Both Proposal 3 and Proposal 4 are drafted as Article 23. If both pass, the numbering would need to be reconciled; nothing in either text says how.
The bottom line
Whether Vermont should write equal protection into its own constitution with a named list of grounds — an enforceable state guarantee that does not depend on federal law, against a text opponents say reads as unequal by listing some groups and carving out measures for others.
One neutral sentence describing the tradeoff — not a recommendation.
Sources (3)The numbers in the text above link here
- 1Governor Phil Scott Formally Proclaims Constitutional Amendment Proposals 3 and 4 Will Appear on November Ballot — Office of Governor Phil Scott — governor.vermont.gov
- 2Vermont Proposal 4, Equal Protection of Law Amendment (2026) — Ballotpedia — ballotpedia.org
- 3Vermont voters to consider 2 constitutional amendments on November ballot — WCAX — wcax.com
Checking it against the official text
The Vermont Secretary of State publishes the certified measures and, in most states, an official voter guide with fiscal notes. That is the authoritative version. Everything here is an explanation of it, not a substitute for it.
Confirm this with the official source
Your ballot is determined by your election authority, not by us. Verify your registration, precinct, and sample ballot at Vermont Secretary of State.