May state legislative applications limit an Article V convention? Subject, yes; specific language, probably not
- September 12, 2013
CONSTITUTION – Uncategorized
- Home
- CONSTITUTION – Uncategorized
Who Says History is Relevant to Article V? Well, the U.S. Supreme Court, For One!0
- October 10, 2013
In 1988, Oxford University Press published Russell Caplan’s book Constitutional Brinksmanship. It revealed some of the extensive history behind the Convention for Proposing Amendments in Article V of the Constitution. More recently, we have learned much more about that history. We now know that there were over 30 multi-colony and multi-state conventions before the Constitution
READ MOREMadison and the Amendments Convention: A New Chapter in a Brand New Book0
- September 15, 2013
A new book, edited by Professor Neil H. Cogan, has just been issued in which well-known constitutional scholars from across the political spectrum explore issues of state interposition, nullification, and secession. I am among the contributors: I wrote the second chapter, which is entitled James Madison and the Constitution’s Convention for Proposing Amendments. The book
READ MOREMay state legislative applications limit an Article V convention? Subject, yes; specific language, probably not0
- September 12, 2013
Some constitutional scholars believe state applications for a convention for proposing amendments may limit the convention to voting “yes” or “no” on a specifically-worded amendment. A prescribed-wording application, they say, reduces the fear of a “runaway” convention and places the state legislatures in the equal position with Congress that Article V of the Constitution was
READ MORE
How We Have Learned More and More About the Constitution's "Convention for Proposing Amendments"0
- August 30, 2013
Listen to Mark Levin’s interview of Rob here. (Go to Aug. 29 podcast, and fast forward to minute 55.) This past week, conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly contributed a short piece to Townhall.com in which she attacked the movement for an Article V convention. As I wrote in my response, she was relying on claims about
READ MOREAnd You “Can’t” Defund Obamacare . . . Why?0
- August 25, 2013
Freedom and popular government in Britain and America became possible because over the course of many years the House of Commons, and later the American colonial legislatures, were willing to exert the power of the purse to discipline an overreaching executive. In Britain, the House of Commons—Parliament’s lower chamber—sometimes defunded the executive in order to
READ MOREThe Problems With Repealing the Direct Election of Senators/17th Amendment0
- August 24, 2013
Some political activists argue for repeal of the 17th amendment. In other words, they want to end popular elections of U.S. Senators and return to the original constitutional system of election by state legislatures. Repeal advocates argue that the pre-17th amendment system better preserved federalism than does direct election. Whatever the theoretical merits of their
READ MORE
