[kvanbrunt2]

The critical statement: “In a few instances, States have sent official documents to NARA to record the rejection of an amendment or the rescission of a prior ratification. The Archivist does not make any substantive determinations as to the validity of State ratification actions, but it has been established that the Archivist’s certification of the facial legal sufficiency of ratification documents is final and conclusive.” I read this as rescission of prior ratification have no legal basis. Once a state ratifies, and that ratification is certified, it is permanent. This being the case, if Illinois current resolution passes, it most likely means that an Article V convention will be called. Importantly, wherever the convention is held will have to have the tightest security the US has ever seen for such an event. Every spy on the planet and our federal government, every terroristfrom our federal government, every corporation, and a whole bunch of others from our federal government will do anything to penetrate it.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

Well said, but that the federal government would try to stop or subvert it is kind of obvious. In truth, I expect that if the SCOTUS involves itself at any level, that is, does not firmly refuse to hear any appeals about the convention, and even goes so far as to instruct the judiciary that it is not their business, there is going to be trouble.

The federal judiciary has no authority over a convention, and if the convention votes it, any federal judge who involves himself, as well as any federal agency or individual, can be immediately suspended or even arrested.

That point should not be neglected: that the convention may sit as a judge and jury, and basically order villains to prison for an indeterminate length of time, while they accomplish their purpose.