The (Long Overdue) Case for Article V, Convention of States
From the Beginning: What is Article V?
Article V came out of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, and it is 143 words smack dab in the middle of the US Constitution itself. It was 
proposed by George Mason of Virginia on September 15th, 1787 (two days before the US Constitution was sent out to the states to ratify). Essentially, George Mason, who didn’t sign the US Constitution (only because it didn’t have the Bill of Rights with ratification but Madison was good as his word and added them all as the first order of business when the US Congress was created) was concerned as what would happen to the new American nation if Congress was the only institution that could initiate amendments to change the US Constitution. What if, Mr. Mason asked, would occur if the Congress didn’t want to (essentially) reform itself, constitutionally? Well, everyone there – Federalist and Anti-Federalist – apparently thought this was such a wise idea that no one objected (for non-lawyers such as myself, nemine contradicente, or nem con, means “without dissent”). This means that everyone from arch-Federalist Alexander Hamilton to arch-anti-Federalist Patrick Henry agreed on it, and everyone in-between as well.
Essentially it states that the US Constitution can be amended by the US Congress (which is what all of our amendments have been enacted and ratified with) or by 2/3rds of the states themselves by calling an amending convention (not a constitutional one) directly via their state’s representatives. More on this later in this article.
Now I believe the Founding Fathers, honestly, would be appalled that we haven’t used Article V to solve the bloated and unconstitutional government we have now a long time ago, but here we are.
Modern Scholarship (Right and Wrong) About Article V
Professor Robert Natelson, a retired law professor and the founder of the 
invaluable Article V Info Center, is the premier scholar of the true meaning of Article V in the modern era. Initially, he was skeptical about Article V, but then he realized that what he read was wrong. Since then, he has tirelessly tried to set the record straight on what Conventions are, including a partial one that just went over 100 years of operation, and no one bats an eye or argues about. And he’s not alone. Just recently, the Heritage Foundation recently signed on to Article V (no, conspiracy theorists, this isn’t a part of Project 2025). Essentially, he found out by reading the actual instructions of the states to their delegates in 1787, everything he had “learned” about Article V was wrong. He further found out that much of the anti-Convention talking points of our modern era resulted from incorrect and completely dishonest “scholarship” of liberal law professors (beginning in the 1960s) designed to permanently discredit any attempts to overturn the administrative state. Professor Natelson has a column in The Epoch Times, has written multiple articles on numerous constitutional issues for any number of publications and a book entitled The Original Constitution. He’s written the handbook on Article V amendments. Together with the Heritage Foundation, and other scholars, it is safe to say that the intellectual background regarding Article V is solid.
Enjoy and will see you in # 3
