List of rescissions of Article V Convention applications

Last updated

Article V of the United States Constitution provides that the legislatures of the several states may apply to Congress for a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution. Left unclear, however, is whether a state's legislature which has applied to Congress for such a convention may later change its sentiment and rescind such application.

Contents

If the purpose of Article V is to give state legislators power over a recalcitrant Congressand if state lawmakers may indeed limit their applications by specific subject matterit is possible that, if the question were ever put before them, federal courts would hold that a rescission of a previous application is likewise valid, in order to give more meaningful effect to the power which Article V confers upon state legislators.

Recent activities

The legislatures of some states which, at various times, have made application to Congress for the calling of an Article V amendatory convention, have later rescinded such petitions. During the period between 1988 and 2024, it is known that lawmakers in 26 states adopted legislation to rescind previous legislative measures to apply for such a convention. Perhaps there were others in addition to the 26 which are confirmed and listed below. Remaining unclear from the language of Article Vand subject to debateis whether an application, once made by a state legislature, may be subsequently revoked by that state's legislature.

From 2008 to 2024 in 13 of those very same 26 states, lawmakers changed their minds yet againback in the direction of favoring that an Article V amendatory convention in fact be called.

List of state legislative rescissions (1988–2024)

What follows is a listing of states whose legislatures are confirmed to have approved resolutions and memorials rescinding previous resolutions and memorials applying for an Article V amendatory convention. These known rescissions from 26 states have been officially received by at least one of the two houses of Congress and were, at a minimum, summarized in the Congressional Record and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary in either house of Congress. Again, the list below, covering 1988 to present, might not be all-inclusive:

Unsuccessful efforts to rescind prior Article V Convention applications (2009–2017)

From 2011 to 2017, unsuccessful measures to rescind previous convention calls were known to have been introduced in 10 states as follows:

2009

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2017

Incomplete state legislative actions in favor of calling an Article V Convention (2010–2020)

2010

During the 2010 state legislative season, there was at least one state in which it is known that Article V amendatory convention applications were approved by one chamber of that state's bicameral legislature. On June 9, 2010, the Louisiana House of Representatives approved ten concurrent resolutions requesting that Congress call separate Article V conventions on various subject matters. Aside from referring all ten of them to its Finance Committeewhere they all diedthe Louisiana Senate did not take further action on these concurrent resolutions:

2011

During the 2011 state legislative season, there were at least five states in which it is known that Article V amendatory convention applications were approved by one chamber of bicameral legislatures. While there may be other examples, the known five are:

2012

During the 2012 state legislative season, it is known that in five states Article V amendatory convention applications were approved by one chamber of a bicameral legislature. While it is possible that there were others, the five known examples are:

Likewise during the 2012 state legislative season, there was one state in which an alleged Article V Convention so-called "application" was approved by only one chamber of a bicameral legislature. That was:

2013

During the 2013 state legislative season, Article V amendatory convention applications received the approval of one chamber of bicameral state legislatures. While it is possible that there were others, the three known examples are:

2014

During the 2014 state legislative season, Article V Convention applications received the approval of one chamber of bicameral state legislatures. While it is possible that there were others, the seven known examples are:

2015

During the 2015 state legislative season, it is known that Article V Convention applications received the approval of one chamber of the following 16 bicameral state legislatures:

2016

During the 2016 state legislative season, it is known that Article V Convention applications received the approval of one chamber of the following 10 bicameral state legislatures:

2017

During the 2017 state legislative season, it is known that Article V Convention applications received the approval of one chamber of the following four bicameral state legislatures:

Likewise during the 2017 state legislative season, there was one state in which an alleged Article V Convention so-called "application" was approved by only one chamber of a bicameral legislature. That was:

2018

During the 2018 state legislative season, it is known that there were four Article V Convention applications which received the approval of just one chamber of the following bicameral state legislatures:

2019

During the 2019 state legislative season, it is known that there were three Article V Convention applications which received the approval of just one chamber of the following bicameral state legislatures:

2020

During the 2020 state legislative season, it is known that there was one Article V Convention application which received the approval of just one chamber of the following bicameral state legislature:

Attempts to limit or restrict delegates attending an Article V Convention

The last time that a proposed Federal law was introduced in Congress to establish procedures forand to impose limitations and restrictions upondelegates attending an Article V amendatory convention was in 1991 when United States Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah offered the bill S. 214 ("Constitutional Convention Implementation Act of 1991") during the 102nd Congress. Senator Hatch's proposed Federal legislation received no further consideration than to be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary in the United States Senate on January 15, 1991.

Noting that, for more than two decades, Congress has demonstrated no interest in clarifying, via Federal statute, the limitations and restrictions of an Article V amendatory conventionand deeming it proper to take matters into their own handslawmakers in exactly half of the 50 states have offered legislation in recent years to impose, in state law, limitations and restrictions upon delegates (from those specific states) who would be participating in a national Article V Convention. While there might be others, the following are known examples from 25 states:

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Legislation offered in Congress to call an Article V Convention

In January 1975, during the 94th Congress, U.S. Congressman Jerry Pettis, a Republican from California, introduced House Concurrent Resolution No. 28, calling a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution. In H.Con.Res. 28, Pettis proposed that each state would be entitled to send as many delegates to the convention as it had Senators and Representatives in Congress and that such delegates would be selected in the manner designated by the legislature of each state. With Pettis' death, his colleague, Representative Norman F. Lent, a Republican from New York, introduced similar legislation, House Concurrent Resolution No. 340, during August 1977, for the consideration of the 95th Congress. Both the Pettis and Lent concurrent resolutions received no further consideration than to be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Other proposals for a Convention of the States

Employing a slightly different strategy not attempted previously, there was, in the years 2013 through 2016, a movement afoot within the legislatures of some states to invoke that provision of the United States Constitution which allows for interstate compacts (namely Article I, Section 10) to be utilized for setting uniform ground rules on the applying process for the calling of an Article V convention to propose an amendment to the Constitution which, if such an amendment were to be ratified, would require that the Federal budget be balanced.

From 2013 to 2016, bills are known to have been offered in a number of states that would, if passed, form such a "Compact for America".

2013

Taking yet another approach is the concept of a "management study" offered during 2013 in North Dakota (House Bill No. 1446) which a management study would be "...related to the calling of a convention under article V of the United States Constitution, including concerns associated with a 'runaway' convention and methods through which states have addressed those concerns...". Having passed the North Dakota House of Representatives on February 26, 2013, House Bill No. 1446 was defeated by a vote of 16 yeas and 31 nays in the North Dakota Senate.

2014

2015

2016

At the Federal level, House Concurrent Resolution No. 26 was introduced in the 114th Congress by U.S. Representative Paul Gosar of Arizona ("Effectuating the Compact for a Balanced Budget"). H.Con.Res. 26 has received no further consideration than to be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary in the U.S. House of Representatives on March 19, 2015.

Congressional maintenance of Article V applications and rescissions

One issue of concern over the years has been official receipt by Congress of the applications, and of the rescissions, approved by state lawmakers. In some instances, the process went very smoothly with Congressparticularly the Senateexpeditiously providing readers of the Congressional Record with the full verbatim texts of such applications, or rescissions, which were then referred to committee. But in other cases, retransmitting to Congress the state legislative documentsin some instances multiple timeswas necessary for those state documents to finally be entered word-for-word into the Congressional Record. South Carolina's above-mentioned H. 3400approved in 2004would be a prime example. It took nearly a full decade for that resolution of rescission to be entered into the Congressional Record and to be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary in both the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives. Virginia's 2004 House Joint Resolution No. 194 was similarly situated.

As an outgrowth of that frustration, on March 18, 2014, Senate Joint Memorial No. 104 was approved by the Idaho Legislature calling upon Congress to "...maintain a record of the Article V applications of the states in a form that is open and accessible to the people of the United States." On May 15, 2014, Idaho's S.J.M. No. 104 was designated as "POM-231"; was referred to the U.S. Senate's Committee on the Judiciary; and was published verbatim in the U.S. Senate's portion of the Congressional Record.

See also

List of state applications for an Article V Convention

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Article Five of the United States Constitution</span> Description of amendment procedure

Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the procedure for altering the Constitution. Under Article Five, the process to alter the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments, and subsequent ratification.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1913 amendment establishing the direct election of senators

The Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution established the direct election of United States senators in each state. The amendment supersedes Article I, Section 3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the Constitution, under which senators were elected by state legislatures. It also alters the procedure for filling vacancies in the Senate, allowing for state legislatures to permit their governors to make temporary appointments until a special election can be held.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Equal Rights Amendment</span> Proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution

The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) is a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would, if added, explicitly prohibit sex discrimination. It was written by Alice Paul and Crystal Eastman and introduced in Congress in December 1923 as a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution. The purpose of the ERA is to guarantee equal legal rights for all American citizens regardless of sex. Proponents assert it would end legal distinctions between men and women in matters of divorce, property, employment, and other matters. Opponents originally argued it would remove protections that women needed. In the 21st century, opponents argue it is no longer needed and some disapprove of its potential effects on abortion and transgender rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1961 amendment granting presidential electors to the District of Columbia

The Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution extends the right to participate in presidential elections to the District of Columbia. The amendment grants to the district electors in the Electoral College, as though it were a state, though the district can never have more electors than the least-populous state. How the electors are appointed is to be determined by Congress. The Twenty-third Amendment was proposed by the 86th Congress on June 16, 1960; it was ratified by the requisite number of states on March 29, 1961.

A constitutional amendment is a modification of the constitution of a polity, organization or other type of entity. Amendments are often interwoven into the relevant sections of an existing constitution, directly altering the text. Conversely, they can be appended to the constitution as supplemental additions, thus changing the frame of government without altering the existing text of the document.

Ratification is a principal's legal confirmation of an act of its agent. In international law, ratification is the process by which a state declares its consent to be bound to a treaty. In the case of bilateral treaties, ratification is usually accomplished by exchanging the requisite instruments, and in the case of multilateral treaties, the usual procedure is for the depositary to collect the ratifications of all states, keeping all parties informed of the situation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of the United States Constitution</span>

The United States Constitution has served as the supreme law of the United States since taking effect in 1789. The document was written at the 1787 Philadelphia Convention and was ratified through a series of state conventions held in 1787 and 1788. Since 1789, the Constitution has been amended twenty-seven times; particularly important amendments include the ten amendments of the United States Bill of Rights and the three Reconstruction Amendments.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corwin Amendment</span> Proposed US constitutional amendment to protect slavery from federal power

The Corwin Amendment is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that has never been adopted, but owing to the absence of a ratification deadline, could still be adopted by the state legislatures. It would have shielded slavery within the states from the federal constitutional amendment process and from abolition or interference by Congress.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Child Labor Amendment</span> Proposed U.S. Constitutional Amendment allowing Congress to regulate child labor

The Child Labor Amendment is a proposed and still-pending amendment to the United States Constitution that would specifically authorize Congress to regulate "labor of persons under eighteen years of age". The amendment was proposed on June 2, 1924, following Supreme Court rulings in 1918 and 1922 that federal laws regulating and taxing goods produced by employees under the ages of 14 and 16 were unconstitutional.

A balanced budget amendment or debt brake is a constitutional rule requiring that a state cannot spend more than its income. It requires a balance between the projected receipts and expenditures of the government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Florida</span> Principles, institutions and law of political governance in the U.S. state of Florida

The Constitution of the State of Florida is the document that establishes and describes the powers, duties, structure, and function of the government of the U.S. state of Florida, and establishes the basic law of the state. The current Constitution of Florida was ratified on November 5, 1968.

A convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution, also referred to as an Article V Convention, state convention, or amendatory convention is one of two methods authorized by Article Five of the United States Constitution whereby amendments to the United States Constitution may be proposed: on the Application of two thirds of the State legislatures the Congress shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which become law only after ratification by three-fourths of the states. The Article V convention method has never been used; but 33 amendments have been proposed by the other method, a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress; and 27 of these have been ratified by three-fourths of the States. Although there has never been a federal constitutional convention since the original one, at the state level more than 230 constitutional conventions have assembled in the United States.

State ratifying conventions are one of the two methods established by Article V of the United States Constitution for ratifying proposed constitutional amendments. The only amendment that has been ratified through this method thus far is the 21st Amendment in 1933.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Convention (meeting)</span> Large gathering to discuss a common interest

A convention, in the sense of a meeting, is a gathering of individuals who meet at an arranged place and time in order to discuss or engage in some common interest. The most common conventions are based upon industry, profession, and fandom. Trade conventions typically focus on a particular industry or industry segment, and feature keynote speakers, vendor displays, and other information and activities of interest to the event organizers and attendees. Professional conventions focus on issues of concern along with advancements related to the profession. Such conventions are generally organized by societies or communities dedicated to promotion of the topic of interest. Fan conventions usually feature displays, shows, and sales based on pop culture and guest celebrities. Science fiction conventions traditionally partake of the nature of both professional conventions and fan conventions, with the balance varying from one to another. Conventions also exist for various hobbies, such as gaming or model railroads.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Timeline of drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution</span>

The drafting of the Constitution of the United States began on May 25, 1787, when the Constitutional Convention met for the first time with a quorum at the Pennsylvania State House in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to revise the Articles of Confederation. It ended on September 17, 1787, the day the Frame of Government drafted by the convention's delegates to replace the Articles was adopted and signed. The ratification process for the Constitution began that day, and ended when the final state, Rhode Island, ratified it on May 29, 1790.

The calling of a Second Constitutional Convention of the United States is a proposal made by some academics and activists from across the political spectrum for the purpose of making substantive reforms to the federal government of the United States by rewriting the U.S. Constitution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wolf-PAC</span> American nonpartisan political action committee

Wolf-PAC is an American nonpartisan political action committee formed in 2011 with the goal of adding an "amendment to the United States Constitution to ensure balance, integrity, and transparency to our national system of campaign finance".

The proposed "Liberty" Amendment to the United States Constitution was first proffered, pursuant to the Constitution's Article V, for the consideration of the 82nd United States Congress on June 28, 1952, in the form of House Joint Resolution No. 491 by the late United States Representative Ralph W. Gwinn of New York.

References