May state legislative applications limit an Article V convention? Subject, yes; specific language, probably not
- September 12, 2013
You may have heard alarms that if we hold a national convention for proposing constitutional amendments the gathering would be an uncontrollable constitutional convention (“con-con”) that could propose anything at all. The claim is called the “runaway scenario.” It has almost no basis in history or law. But it has long frightened Americans away from
READ MOREAn old myth has showed up in the media again: the myth that delegates to the 1787 Constitution Convention violated their trust—that they produced a new constitution although empowered only to propose amendments to the Articles of Confederation. Fortunately, the claim that the 1787 convention had no authority to propose a new constitution is pure
READ MOREAmericans finally have a real chance to “clean up the mess in Washington.” That’s the implication of the news that the Arizona legislature has called the first national “convention of states” in over 150 years. The conclave will meet in Phoenix on September 12. Its purpose is to plan for a later convention to propose
READ MOREA 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 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 MORE