May state legislative applications limit an Article V convention? Subject, yes; specific language, probably not
- September 12, 2013
A frequent argument against a convention for proposing constitutional amendments is that there are “no precedents” for determining the rules and procedures for such a gathering, other than the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Although opponents persist in this claim, it has long been debunked: The Constitutional Convention was far from the only meeting of its
READ MOREby Robert G. Natelson State lawmakers sponsoring an Article V convention application often find that other lawmakers want to add extraneous matter to the application. This may include conditions beyond the mere subject-matter, instructions to commissioners, specific amendment language, convention rules, and pronouncements of various kinds. Don’t agree! Adding such material is both unprofessional and
READ MOREA persistent constitutional myth has it that (1) Congress called the Constitutional Convention under the Articles of Confederation, (2) the convention drew its power from Congress, and (3) the convention exceeded its power when it recommended a new Constitution rather than merely propose amendments to the Articles. As readers of this website know, however, the
READ MOREOn April 23, 1787, the Confederation Congress extended the post office franking privilege to all commissioners about to attend the Constitutional Convention. In other words, Congress gave to convention delegates the same privilege to send and receive free mail its own members enjoyed. Why is that important? Because it tends to show that Congress accepted
READ MOREThis is the full version of an op-ed first appearing in the Detroit Daily News. Advocates for term limits want to amend the Constitution to add them. Their most common argument is that restricting how long an elected official may serve will curb special interest influence and other federal abuse. The Articles of Confederation, the document
READ MORE