Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PISANO
It is very difficult to get 2/3's +1 in both the House and Senate but it is almost impossible to get 3/4 ths of the State Legistlatures to ratify.

You're ignoring the alternate method the Constitution provides for ratifying an amendment. Congress can specify that ratification is to be by state legislatures, as it usually does, but it can only specify that it is to be by state conventions. In the one case where the latter method was adopted, the 21st Amendment, the conventions were popularly elected, and ratification was accomplished within the short period of around nine months. I think it is most unlikely that the necessary 1/4 + 1 of state conventions would be elected that would be needed to block ratification of a federal marriage amendment.

201 posted on 11/18/2003 8:18:18 AM PST by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies ]


To: aristeides
Marriage shouldn't be a legal term at all.. The state shouldn't be in the business of deciding who is married and who isn't. And it shouldn't offer benefits or penalties to married couples.
416 posted on 11/18/2003 10:22:56 AM PST by fiscally_right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson