Following a long period of spiritual distance, the kingdom's leadership makes a historic decision to renew the nation's bond with God and ensure the masses can participate in the central national holiday. The king and his advisors hold a formal discussion and reach a joint agreement [ביאור שטיינזלץ], prompting them to send letters throughout all of Israel and Judah [רד״ק]. Their central decision is to delay the observance of Passover to the second month of the year, the month of Iyar [מצודת דוד, ביאור שטיינזלץ].
This delay is necessary because the vast majority of the nation is in a state of ritual impurity. Furthermore, after years of habitual idol worship, the people's hearts are not yet committed to serving God, leaving the general public unready and unwilling to travel to Jerusalem at the traditional time [רד״ק].
Commentators explore the legal framework the leaders use to justify this delay. One perspective suggests the king and his men rely on the existing biblical precedent that allows individuals who are impure to observe a delayed Second Passover in Iyar. In this case, they simply expand that individual solution to cover the entire nation [ביאור שטיינזלץ]. However, the primary approach among commentators is that this is not a standard Second Passover, as the nation does not celebrate the holiday at its original time in Nisan at all. Instead, the leadership decides to adjust the calendar by adding a leap month. They retroactively declare the first month to be a second month of Adar, which effectively turns Iyar into the new Nisan. This calendar adjustment allows the people to celebrate the full seven days of the Festival of Unleavened Bread [רד״ק, מצודת דוד, מלבי״ם].
The authority behind this dramatic decision remains a subject of debate. On one hand, the active participation of the royal officers and the general masses indicates that the move enjoys broad and complete public support [רד״ק]. On the other hand, another approach notes that the king only consults his officials and the general public, deliberately bypassing the approval of the formal council of elders. According to this view, the sages actually oppose the king's actions. They argue that adjusting the calendar so late in the year is improper, and that the widespread impurity of the people is not a valid legal justification for adding an extra month to the year [מלבי״ם].