SC House Panel Calls for US Constitutional Convention

Usnews.com ^ | 4/20/21 | Jeffrey Collins

[cotton1706]

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — A House committee approved a bill Tuesday that would add South Carolina to a list of states calling for a convention to propose amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

The 14-8 vote in the House Judiciary Committee came after arguments from Black lawmakers who fear the open-ended process never used since the Constitution's ratification in 1788 could remove amendments that ended slavery and secured African American voting rights and citizenship.

A conservative lawmaker suggested religious protections and gun rights could be at stake.

The bill would allow South Carolina to join calls for a constitutional convention, limiting the items that could be taken up to spending checks on the federal government, limiting the federal government's jurisdiction and power, and setting term limits for Congress.

About 15 states have passed similar resolutions, and the Constitution requires two-thirds of states, or 34, to call for the convention.

Supporters point out whatever amendments are suggested by the convention would have to be passed by three-fourths of the states — 38 legislatures or special conventions.

[cotton1706]

Ping

[ClearCase_guy]

Got nothing to lose at this point. I hope it happens.

[Publius]

Article V ping.

[Repeal The 17th]

The headline writer does not know the difference between
a “Constitutional Convention” and
an “Article V Convention of the States”.
(nor do many FReepers)

[Publius]

Typical of the sad state of journalism in America.

[Richard Axtell]

Mark Levin will have something worth listening to regarding this vote, and the move towards a “Convention of the States”.

[monkeyshine]

I dunno. I generally think it’s a bad idea, with unintended consequences. Just take the Amendments you want added to the state houses one by one. Opening up a Convention could lead to all kinds of nonsense.

[Repeal 16-17]

Got nothing to lose at this point. I hope it happens.

Exactly. All these fools who talk about a "runaway convention" don't understand we already have that with the Supreme Court, Congress, and the Leftist revolution that is already in progress.

[Repeal 16-17]

Just take the Amendments you want added to the state houses one by one.

That's not how Article V works. Either Congress or an Article V Convention proposes an amendment. That States can vote on whether to ratify only what has been proposed.

[Publius]

This is the usual pedantic boilerplate that I append to these threads. It explains the Article V process for those who don't understand how it works.

***

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

[Repeal The 17th]

“...take the Amendments you want added to the state houses one by one...”
-
That is exactly what an Article V Convention of the States does.
Do not hold your breath while the U.S. Senate proposes an amendment
to repeal the 17th Amendment.

[elpadre]

Considering what we have seen with the manipulation of elections, I am scared to death of a new Constitutional Convention and the subsequent voting.

[Veggie Todd]

...and the Constitution requires two-thirds of states, or 34, to call for the convention.

That's bad math. Two-thirds of 57 is 38, not 34.

[Nateman]

...could remove amendments that ended slavery and secured African American voting rights and citizenship.

It does much more than that. It gives the Federal Government the power to Legislate Cosmic law. Whatever some politicians or Judge feels should be made equal. This is what has effectively gutted the 10th Amendment. The Income Tax and removing State House's from selecting Senators made this even worse. Removing those changes would go a long ways towards bringing back American liberty.

[TermLimits4All]

Yep. Nothing to lose except 2A rights. Oh yeah that’s all but in the dust bin now anyhow.

[TermLimits4All]

So by that information they cannot eliminate 2A but can propose an amendment that essentially eliminates 2A. Correct?

[TermLimits4All]

By the time that happens there will be 2 additional states. DC and Puerto Rico

[Thilly Thailor]

The only issue on the agenda should be to approve a mechanism for states to leave the union.

[Publius]

A Convention of the States could propose an amendment that would repeal the 2nd Amendment. It could also propose an amendment that would repeal any amendment. But then, so could Congress, because Congress has the same proposal rights as a convention.

Would delegates appointed by state legislatures actually permit such an amendment to pass a convention? No.

Would 38 states ratify it? No.