In a recent article, constitutional expert and retired law professor Rob Natelson addressed the role of the U.S. Congress in an Article V convention. The article affirms the notion that the federal government's role in a state-called convention is extremely restricted.
Past arguments have asserted that Congress could dominate a process inserted into the Constitution to bypass Congress. However, years of scholarly review have discredited this claim. Rather, by calling an Article V convention, the states join together as a force comparable to the powers of the federal government.
This article was first published by Independence Institute and written by Article V expert Rob Natelson.
Recently, a Polish scholar re-examined the question of exactly what Congress’s role in the convention process is. Tomasz Wieciech of Jagiellon University in Krakow published his conclusions in an article entitled, Congress’ Obligation to Call a Convention of States under Article V of the United States Constitution (pdf). It appears in a journal called Constitutional Law Review. (I have the article, courtesy of Professor Seth Barrett Tillman, but have not been able to access the journal.)
Dr. Wieciech concludes that the role of Congress in the procedure is very limited—thereby confirming the findings of the latest wave of scholarship. Specifically, he concludes that:
- Congress may reject an application that fails as an application for formal reasons (for example, it is not adopted by a state legislature), but not for substantive reasons;
- Congress may not control the process by legislation;
- Congress may not reject unrescinded applications because they are old or because they are limited in scope.
As he accurately summarizes, “To give Congress any substantive power over the process . . .would defeat the whole purpose of an alternative and additional mode for amending the Constitution.”
Support the Convention of States movement by signing the petition below.
