agree, but how does one then explain the government’s enforcement of the 16th amendment since it was never verifiably ratified by enough states but is yet being enforced. This would never play but I would be more apt to trust a convention if there were no lawyers allowed or involved.
The Delegates sent to the convention in 1787 ignored the Articles of Confederation, which were then in effect, and by its very wording was forbidden to be altered but by a unanimous consent of the States. Instead of following the Articles of Confederation, they arbitrarily decided that the new constitution and new government they created would become effective if a mere nine States ratified what they did.
JWK