WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 5860

State management: funds; use of state funds for implementation of federal treaties not ratified; prohibit. Creates new act.

2023-2024 Regular Session Introduced by Greg Alexander and 6 co-sponsors

Prohibits using state funds or resources to implement unratified treaties; allows civil action up to $10,000 per violation and requires proof of independence for related rules.

bill electronically reproduced 06/26/2024
#statemanagement:funds
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 5860

Summary: House Bill 5860 — Unratified Treaties Implementation Prohibition Act

Overview

HB 5860 seeks to bar the use of state funds, personnel, facilities, or other state resources to implement the provisions of any unratified treaty. An “unratified treaty” is defined as any treaty or international agreement not approved by a 2/3 vote of the U.S. Senate and not ratified by the President. The bill provides civil remedies for violations and imposes a burden-of-proof requirement on state departments or agencies that publish rules or guidance tied to an unratified treaty.

Key Provisions

  • Prohibition (Sec. 3): A person may not use state funds, personnel, facilities, or other state resources to implement provisions of an unratified treaty.

  • Definitions (Sec. 2):

    • “Unratified treaty” means an agreement not approved by a 2/3 Senate vote and not ratified by the President under Article II.
    • “Person” includes individuals and various legal and governmental entities.

  • Civil Remedies (Sec. 4):

    • Violations give rise to a state-court action for injunctive and declaratory relief, plus compensatory damages up to $10,000 per violation, and attorney fees.
    • If a state department, agency, or political subdivision publishes a rule, regulation, or guidance that recommends or requires compliance with an unratified treaty, it bears the burden to prove:
    • The rule/regulation/guidance was developed independently of influence by the treaty proposer, and independently of any international entity; and
    • The unratified treaty was not a factor in the decision to publish the rule/regulation/guidance.

Who Is Affected

  • State agencies, departments, and political subdivisions would be directly prohibited from implementing unratified treaties.
  • “Persons” (including individuals, corporations, LLCs, associations, or governmental entities) could face civil actions for violations and be liable for damages under the act.

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Introduced: June 26, 2024 ( Rep. Brad Paquette and several co-sponsors ).
  • Initial Action: Referred to the Committee on Government Operations; first reading occurred on introduction date.
  • Legislative Actions (as listed):
    • 2024-06-26: Introduced; read a first time; referred to Government Operations.
    • 2025-01-22: Reported as REF. TO JOINT COMMITTEE ON Education (note: indicates a subsequent referral, possibly relating to overlapping committee jurisdiction in later stages).

Potential Impacts and Considerations

  • Establishes a clear firewall against state coordination with international agreements not approved by the U.S. Senate and President.
  • Creates monetary liability ($10,000 per violation) and attorney-fee recovery, which could incentivize compliance and deter state actions integrating unratified treaties.
  • Imposes a procedural standard on agencies publishing rules or guidance related to unratified treaties, requiring evidence of independence from treaty proponents and international influence.
  • Could complicate state-level responses to federal or international initiatives pending Senate ratification, and may affect intergovernmental collaborations tied to non-ratified agreements.

Next Steps

  • The bill would need approval from both chambers and the governor to become law. If advanced, it would likely undergo committee hearings, potential amendments, and floor votes.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.