[Publius]

This is the usual pedantic boilerplate that I post to these threads to explain the process under Article V.

***

The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps: Proposal, Disposal, and 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.
• The Amendments Convention Method requires the legislatures of two thirds of the states to apply to Congress to call a Convention for Proposing Amendments. 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, no more and no less.

Disposal:

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 twice: once to ratify the Constitution, and once to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition.

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 one implicitly forbidden subject.

Explicitly forbidden:

• No amendment may be added to the Constitution concerning slavery or capitation taxes until 1808. We’re well past that deadline.
• 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:

• 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;” therefore, the Constitution of 1787 is locked in place forever. Congress and an Amendments Convention have exactly the same Proposal power; therefore, neither Congress nor an Amendments Convention can start over. Both bodies can only propose amendments.

Reference works:

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

State Initiation of Constitutional Amendments: A Guide for Lawyers and Legislative Drafters

[srmanuel]

Regardless of the method ratification, I read it as 3/4th of the states have to approve any amendment...

Which means 13 states could kill any amendment....

I can’t imagine less than 13 states would vote to eliminate the 2nd amendment or how we elect Presidents...

[Gator113]

Thank you for taking the time to spoon-feed some of us.

[dayglored]

Thank you for posting your usual pedantic boilerplate — much needed sanity.

[Jacquerie]

<>The State Ratifying Convention Method has only been used twice: once to ratify the Constitution, and once to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition.<>

IOW, the COS did not runaway.

[stremba]

Thank you. There’s a lot of wacky misinformation that gets posted on these Article V convention threads. In reality, the amendments arising from such a convention are no different from ones proposed by Congress. It’s part of the Constitution, not some radical method for overturning and destroying it.

The real reason for the A5 convention method for proposing amendments is sound. If you look at the ratification process, it involves none of the three branches of the Federal government — ratification is done by the states, either by the legislature or special ratifying conventions. Proposing amendments is a different story. Without the A5 convention method, the only way to propose amendments would be via Congress. The Founders realized that there might come a time where we might need to limit the power of Congress by amending the Constitution. For example, we might want to propose amendments limiting the number of terms that members of the House and Senate can serve. Congress would be unlikely to propose an amendment such as this limiting its own power. The Article V convention gives an alternate method to propose amendments that Congress would not willingly propose.

[GILTN1stborn]

I would like to sincerely say Thank you for your never ending resolve trying and help everyone understand the meaning of Article V. Unfortunately, although ignorance can sometimes be helped, stupidity cannot.