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

Skip to comments.

"A Convention for Proposing Amendments...as Part of This Constitution"
A Publius Essay | 27 March 2006 | Publius

Posted on 03/27/2006 7:58:11 PM PST by Publius

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last
This essay was originally posted on 12/5/2000. I have revised it after having it corrected by "Congressman Billybob", who is a constitutional lawyer.
1 posted on 03/27/2006 7:58:14 PM PST by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Publius

Another thing that could happen at a Convention... the old Constitution could be scrapped completely.


2 posted on 03/27/2006 8:01:22 PM PST by Lunatic Fringe (http://ntxsolutions.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius

Too many rats and too many chicken crap republicans to force an amendment.


3 posted on 03/27/2006 8:02:26 PM PST by satchmodog9 (Most people stand on the tracks and never even hear the train coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lunatic Fringe

If you read the essay completely, you'd see that your fear is not valid. The scrapping of the Constitution is forbidden. Please read the essay thoroughly.


4 posted on 03/27/2006 8:03:54 PM PST by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Publius
I did. Unless Article V is amended first to allow it, a Convention for Proposing Amendments can never become a true constitutional convention, i.e., it can never write a new constitution. And neither can Congress.
5 posted on 03/27/2006 8:06:52 PM PST by Lunatic Fringe (http://ntxsolutions.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Publius
Another backstop of the Constitution is secession.

It's misleading to think muleskiners and hayseeds would show up as state delegates - they would most likely be politicians of some sort.

6 posted on 03/27/2006 8:13:55 PM PST by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner

That's why I mentioned Agenda Item #13.


7 posted on 03/27/2006 8:14:57 PM PST by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Publius
A delegate from New York will introduce an amendment to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

How many states have shall-issued concealed carry?

8 posted on 03/27/2006 8:37:01 PM PST by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius

Ho wdo you go about limiting a convention if it gets ambitious? Remember, the convention that gave us the Constitution was only charged with amending the Articles of Confederation. Insetad, it threw them out.


9 posted on 03/27/2006 8:38:38 PM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP

But it still had to be ratified by the states.


10 posted on 03/27/2006 8:45:48 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
But it still had to be ratified by the states.

And with the nutballs in government today, you could probably get numerous states to ratify a brand-new, socialist constitution.

11 posted on 03/27/2006 8:48:57 PM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TBP

Someone needs to post "the map" again.


12 posted on 03/27/2006 8:50:05 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

Nice essay. Its too bad that the states don't actually use one of the few checks they have left on the national government. As long as the states don't try to dump the whole Constitution at a convention, people will feel more comfortable with using that method of proposing amendments.


13 posted on 03/27/2006 8:51:33 PM PST by old republic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP
I'd like to repeat this paragraph to answer your question;

An Article V Convention is the property of the states, and the language used by the states to request Congress to call a convention defines the purview of that convention. In its petitioning language, the states may ask for a convention to address one subject, a plethora of subjects, or even ask for a general convention to address any subject, i.e. a revision of the Constitution.

The states define what the convention is permitted to address.

14 posted on 03/27/2006 8:52:42 PM PST by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
But it still had to be ratified by the states.

That is a quaint notion, JimRob. But Justice Black foresaw this day long ago with his dissent in Griswold:

BLACK, J., Dissenting Opinion

Use of any such broad, unbounded judicial authority would make of this Court's members a day-to-day constitutional convention.

So there is no need to have a Constitutional Convention. As Justice Black predicted, we have one every time SCOTUS convenes.

15 posted on 03/27/2006 8:54:57 PM PST by dirtboy (Tagline under contruction. Fines doubled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Publius

And the convention can run away and propose just about anything. As a practical matter, how do you stop them?


16 posted on 03/27/2006 8:55:36 PM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TBP
I answered your question in the preceding post. A convention cannot "run away". Its authority is limited by the states' petitioning language.

If the states request a general revision of the Constitution, then it can address amendment proposals on any subject it wished. But not until. That potential aganda I listed is what might happen if the states requested an open convention to address any subject.

Failing such all-encompassing language, a convention would be restricted to the subject(s) that the states requested it to address.

17 posted on 03/27/2006 8:59:30 PM PST by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: old republic

Actually, I wrote the essay. Congressman Billybob took a look and caught me on two blatant mistakes.


18 posted on 03/27/2006 9:00:17 PM PST by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Publius

I would not trust either a democrat or a republican with the constitution. Your idea is horseshit.


19 posted on 03/27/2006 9:04:10 PM PST by Modok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius

Yes, but how do you keep the convention from simply ignoring the restrictions? Politicians don't like restrictions on their authority.

As I said, the Constitutional Convention was a "ruanway" convention that exceeded its mandate to amend the Articles of Confederation.


20 posted on 03/27/2006 9:04:54 PM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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