May state legislative applications limit an Article V convention? Subject, yes; specific language, probably not
- September 12, 2013
If you assume that counting persons is the proper basis for congressional representation, it’s easy to see how one could misread the reduction for slaves and the exclusion of non-tax-paying Indians as expressions of racism. However, many, probably most, of the framers did not think counting persons was the proper basis for representation.
READ MOREStates can refuse to cooperate with a federal program or enforce an unconstitutional federal law.
READ MOREBased on the Constitution’s text and history, Congress’s power to regulate its own elections should be narrowly construed.
READ MOREH.R. 1 contains some sections that are perfectly constitutional . . . .But they are intertwined with provisions that are clearly (or arguably) unconstitutional. This intertwining would take decades of litigation to unravel.
READ MOREFrantic claims that it’s a “constitutional convention” … or that it can issue a new document or “radically re-write” the existing one … or change the ratification procedure—none of these have any legal or historical basis.
READ MORESometimes after examining the text it even remains unclear whether that text is unclear! What seems obvious on initial examination may be entirely wrong.
READ MORE