Gov. Gavin Newsom Officially Calls for Convention to Change US Constitution

The Western Journal (via MSN) ^ | 15 September 2023 | Richard Moorhead

[aculeus]

Be afraid.

Be very afraid.

[Rattlesnake_Snook]

The reason why the democrats are so scared is because there is currently a case upcoming on the SCOTUS docket which will allow SCOTUS to declare ALL state laws null and void in regards to firearms

[Responsibility2nd]

The enemy announces his plans.

——————————————————

Yeah. His plans for the presidency.

[LegendHasIt]

Aw, Come on, Gavin. Quit pretending that you want to change it, when what you really want is to do away with it completely.

[Publius]

This is the usual pedantic boilerplate that I append to these threads. It explains the Article V process for those who don't understand it fully. I've had the verbiage edited for accuracy by a retired professor of constitutional law.

---

THE ARTICLE V AMENDATORY PROCESS

The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps:

1. Proposal;
2. Direction;
3. Ratification.

Proposal:

There are two ways to propose an amendment to the Constitution.

• The Congressional method requires the House and Senate to pass an amendment by a two thirds majority of each house.
• The amendments convention method requires the legislatures of two thirds of the states to pass resolutions directing Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments. These resolutions are called applications. Once the two thirds threshold is reached, Congress is required to set a time and place for the convention.

Article V gives Congress and an amendments convention exactly the same power to propose amendments, except that a convention is limited to proposing amendments specified in the application and there is no such limit on Congress.

Direction:

Once Congress, or an amendments convention, proposes amendments, Congress must decide whether the states will ratify by the:

• State legislature method, or the
• State ratifying convention method.

The state ratifying convention method has only been used once: to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition. A similar procedure was used to ratify the Constitution itself.

Ratification:

Depending upon which ratification method is chosen by Congress, either the state legislatures vote up-or-down on the proposed amendment, or the voters elect a state ratifying convention to vote up-or-down. If three fourths of the states vote to ratify, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.

Forbidden Subjects:

Article V contains two explicitly forbidden subjects and two implicitly forbidden subjects.

Explicitly forbidden:

1. No amendment may be added to the Constitution concerning the slave trade or direct taxes until 1808. We’re well past that deadline.
2. No amendment may be added to the Constitution to change the principle of equal representation in the Senate unless every state deprived of that right approves. If California wants five senators, every state must have five senators. To permit violation of this principle, every state would have to ratify the amendment, not just three fourths.

Implicitly forbidden:

1. The Constitution of 1787 may not be abrogated and replaced with a new document. Article V only authorizes “a convention for proposing amendments to this Constitution;” so the Constitution of 1787 is locked in place.
2. A convention for proposing amendments is limited to the topics authorized by state applications.

Reference work:

Proposing Constitutional Amendments by a Convention of the States: A Handbook for State Lawmakers

[Ronin]

He should be careful what he wishes for. Once a Constitutional Convention has been convened, nobody can tell it what to do. The end results might be much worse than he or anyone else has contemplated.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Yeah. His plans for the presidency dictatorship.

[faithhopecharity]

if the leftist/commie/nazis ever finish suppressing or canceling the 2A, there will be no limit on their confiscation of our property, liberties, or even lives.
Like any other dictators in history

[chopperk]

Marxist Dems need control of guns. With control they could totally destroy the Constitution.

[C210N]

Why don’t they just go for this wording for the 28th amendment:

Section 1

The second amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall be infringed by statutes and judicial decrees.

---

Oh, wait.... I gather that they are already doing this.

[antidemoncrat]

The Demoncrats ... I mean Democrats ... maybe ... have always wanted to change the Constitution into a “Living Document”. What does that mean? A “living Document” is a document they reinterpret every day to fit what ever they want to accomplish that day and not be charged with violating the constitution.

[PROCON]

RKBA Ping List

This Ping List is for all news pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.

FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from this Ping List.

More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.

[Gay State Conservative]

Several recent SCOTUS decisions have helped define and enhance the right to keep and bear arms. A recent one...."Caetano v Massachusetts" struck down a Massachusetts gun law regulating the types of weapons that one can own,calling it "frivolous". It was a 9-0 vote in favor of Caetano.

Governor Hair Gel and his ilk know that three quarters of state legislatures would *never* approve any repeal...or changes...to 2A.

[Cowgirl of Justice]

Yep.

Bye bye military.

[butlerweave]

Newsom is insane no sane person could do the damage he has done

[frank ballenger]

Bernie Sanders: I’ll be there. Tears in my eyes but there.

And
In 2008, presidential candidate Barak Obama said that his goal as president was to “fundamentally change America.”

Now their time will come.

[P-Marlowe]

This is why an Article V convention is a horrible idea.

[Publius]

He should be careful what he wishes for. Once a Constitutional Convention has been convened, nobody can tell it what to do.

Not true. Please read Post #25.

[Jonty30]

Normally, yes. 3/4 of the states would also not agree to give up their Tenth Amendment rights in order to serve the big states.

However, there is always a chance that the liberals have figured out some seemingly innocuous loop hole that they can use later to get what they want or as a thin edge to the wedge.

One should always be asking what they are up to when they call for a Constitutional convention that they supposedly cannot win.

[Publius]

For a Convention of the States dedicated to Georgia’s application language, which would re-balance citizens’ rights and state powers versus federal power, the count is 19 down, 15 to go.

Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin

For a Convention of the States dedicated to a balanced budget amendment only, the count is 30 down, 4 to go.