Lawmakers have spent months whispering concerns that ballot questions to subject them to the public records law and to reform the system of legislative stipends are unconstitutional, and now senators want the state’s highest court to provide some important feedback.

The Senate voted Thursday to ask the Supreme Judicial Court for opinions on whether the pair of reform-the-Legislature ballot questions run afoul of the constitutional separation of powers, a rare move that could reshape debate heating into the thicket of election season.

It’s a different legal technique than a lawsuit challenging either measure’s eligibility to go before voters, and, unlike a decision in such a case, the answers that justices hand down would not be legally binding.

Still, the decision to turn to the court reflects growing legislative resistance to the campaigns by disgruntled transparency advocates, who want to wrench open Beacon Hill’s curtains and force the Legislature to make operational changes.

Senators linked their request to the ongoing fallout from Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s attempts to audit the House and Senate. Voters embraced that idea with landslide adoption of a ballot question in 2024, but the probe remains in limbo amid sustained opposition from top Democrats, who view it as unconstitutional overreach.

“Candidly, misunderstandings and a lack of clear explanation of the constitutional implications of [the audit question] during the last ballot cycle [have] led to confusion and frustration — both on the part of the legislators who are obliged to uphold the Constitution and the voters who voted for it,” Senate Majority Leader Cynthia Creem wrote in a post Thursday, which made no explicit reference to either ballot question. “That issue is now with the courts, and we are hopeful that they will provide resolution on this issue soon.”

“The steps we’re taking today aim to avoid similar confusion about some of the ballot questions now before us,” she added.

Meanwhile, Republicans used the Thursday action as a chance to push once again for action to clear up a legal logjam preventing the voter-approved audit law from taking effect. Soon after the chamber voted to request SJC opinions on the two latest proposals, the GOP caucus wrote to Senate President Karen Spilka asking to do the same for the audit law.

Lawmakers have already signaled skepticism about the records question, which they argue could violate their constituents’ privacy, and the stipends reform proposal, which would condition significant chunks of legislative pay on new performance metrics.