Conventions within the states to ratify an amendment to the United States Constitution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Besides the more common method, Article V establishes the possibility of conventions within the individual states to ratify an amendment to the United States Constitution.
Article V reads (italics added):
| “ | The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths thereof, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress...,Provided...that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. | ” |
[edit] Use of the convention ratification option
In the history of the United States, this particular method of ratifying an officially proposed amendment was used but once, in the 1933 ratification process of the 21st Amendment. This is also the only case in which one constitutional amendment repealed another constitutional amendment; the 21st Amendment explicitly repealed the 18th Amendment (which had been ratified 14 years earlier)
[edit] Apparent purpose of the alternative ratification procedure
Clearly, the framers of the Constitution wanted a means of sometimes bypassing the state legislatures in the ratification process. To some extent, the convention method of ratification loosely approximates a national referendum on a specific proposed constitutional amendment, thus allowing the sentiments of registered voters to be had on highly sensitive issues.
However, that did not stop a stipulation in New Mexico state law that provides that members of that state's legislature would themselves make up such a convention, if Congress again selects that ratification method.
[edit] Limits and comparisons
A state ratifying convention has no modification or proposal powers. It may only debate upon, and then either approve or reject the proposed amendment, unlike a convention to propose amendments to U.S. Constitution.
Also, such a ratifying convention is different from a constitutional convention insofar as the latter term is sometimes understood to designate an assembly whose purpose is to write an entirely new constitution for the country as a whole.
The U.S. Constitution, unlike of some of the states' constitutions, contains no specific provision for a national convention that would completely replace the existing constitution; however a national convention called to propose amendments under Article V could theoretically propose (an) amendment(s) which would be tantamount to an entirely new constitution—but even an entirely new constitution would subsequently require ratification in three-fourths of the state legislatures or by three-fourths of the conventions held within the states with Congress choosing which option to use, as Article V of the current document demands. It is noteworthy that the present constitution was proposed by a convention originally called to do nothing more than to amend the Articles of Confederation. See Convention to propose amendments to U.S. Constitution
