[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Article V - an analysis

To: Jim Choate <[email protected]>, Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Article V - an analysis
From: Todd Larason <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 14:59:46 -0800
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from Jim Choate on Wed, Nov 25, 1998 at 04:58:13PM -0600
References: <[email protected]>
Sender: [email protected]

On 981125, Jim Choate wrote:
> Or when Congress is directed by 2/3 of the state legislatures a convention
> can be called for *proposing* amendments

Note that although it's clear that this is only for proposing amendments, our
history leaves some doubt that's what would actually happen.  The current
constitution came ouf of a constitutional convention called under the Articles 
of Confederation to discuss amendments, but was finally enacted under
procedures *it* specified, not the procedures specified in the Articles.

> The only sticky wicket I see is the ...proposed by Congress. Does this mean
> that Congress can decide which of the two it will recognize? 

Historically, Congress has always specified, at the time it proposes the
amendments.  I believe all but the repeal of prohibition were handled using
the legislature method.
-- 
ICQ UIN: 125844100

References:
- Article V - an analysis
  - From: Jim Choate <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: How to reign the federal government in... (fwd)
Next by Date: Article V - an analysis
Prev by thread: Article V - an analysis
Next by thread: Re: Article V - an analysis
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread