The Constitution did not specify how the delegates to an a Article V Convention would be selected. Because this power was not given to the Federal Government according to the 10th Amendment that authority was to be reserved to the states respectively or to the people.
With the ratification of the 14th Amendment the requirement that all citizens be are entitled to due process and equal protection under the law. If one citizen is a member of Congress and has the right to propose amendments to the Constitution then another citizen that is a delegate to an Article V Convention needs to be treated equally. The qualification of a member of Congress would need to be the same as the qualifications for a delegate to an Article V Convention. They would both need to be elected by the people in their respective Congressional Districts.
Since the rules and procedures to be followed at an Article V Convention are not specified in the Constitution, the authority to establish how the Convention would be conducted is left to the discretion of the state delegates.
The Constitution does not specify that the states can rescind their application for a convention after it has been submitted, but it also does not specifically prohibit a state from rescinding its application. It is my opinion that Congress has no authority to deny the states the right to change their mind.
There is no requirement in Article V stating that the applications for an Article V Convention submitted by the states need to specify why the state submitted their application. I believe that as long as 34 applications are filed by the states, Congress must call for a Convention. Article V does not require the states to give the reason why they were desirous to have Convention. When the states send their delegates to the Convention,the states can instruct their delegates to only vote for proposed amendments that have already been discussed and approved of by their state's legislature.
Many people refer to an Article V Convention as a Constitutional Convention. This label is not accurate. An Article V Convention is a Convention to Propose Amendments to the Constitution. In a Con Con the entire Constitution is on the table and the Convention could decide to completely abolish the Constitution. An Article V Convention is not a Convention to change anything, it is simply a Convention to propose amendments for the states to consider. A Con is a very bad idea, but a Convention to propose amendments is a very good idea.
Wisconsin Resolution of 1929 to Call for an Article V Convention
Replies
Are you aware there is evidence that 14th Amendment was never ratified?
I am new to this group and have seen much about Article 5. That brings these question to mind.
Will you please explain the push for a constitution convention?
What amendments (or at least the jist of the content) do you propose?
Does not convening a constitutional convention open the door for changes not desired?
If there are grievances, that is what the grand jury is for.
OP,
The 14th is one of the worst or best crafted amendments depending on your point of view as it has been used by changing word meaning - filling in where they find a hole - using it to force Federal Supremacy - it was intended to insure that blacks were not prevented from voting - the areas of desired protection are contained in the Articles and the first ten amendments - ALL MEN not all white men so this is now the club which the courts discover anything they desire to reduce States rights and powers and therefor the Peoples rights and powers - as the States were to be the protectors of the people of the many States from usurping and tyrannical oppressive Federal [central] governments and courts.
Find more arguments here . . http://www.articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/14th-support-discuss...
Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights
<<Back | Table of Contents | Next>>
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid orcomfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Notes for this amendment:
Proposed 6/13/1866
Ratified 7/9/1868
Note
History
Article 1, Section 2
Thank you for your input. I have been told that the Southern States would not be allowed to return their members of Congress to office unless they agreed to ratify the 14th Amendment. It was ratified not by the free will of the people, but at the point of a bayonet. When an individual or state is compelled to sign an agreement fraud has taken place. The states would have been denied their right to representation in the Congress if they refused to ratify the 14th Amendment.
Please address my request regarding the Article 5 constitution convention talk. What is the purpose of this talk?
Go here and you will find some debate https://constitutionclub.ning.com/profiles/blogs/a-article-v-amendme...
- then if you really are interested in learning the entire issue visit here http://www.articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/index.html
Wayne Kline said:
Freedom and Liberty for all.
Wayne Kline said:
14th Amendment
The ratification of the 13th Amendment was a major victory for the North, and it was hoped that with the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment, the effects of slavery in the United States would quickly diminish. The original plan to readmit states after acceptance of the 13th was supported by President Andrew Johnson, but the Radical Republicans, as they became known, wanted more than just a return to normalcy. They wanted to keep the power they had attained during the war years. The South did not make it easy for Johnson, however, and the so-called Black Codes started to be passed in Southern states. Congressional inquiries into the Black Codes found them to be a new way of controlling ex-slaves, fraught with violence and cruelty.
The ensuing Reconstruction Acts placed the former CSA states under military rule, and prohibited their congressmen's readmittance to Congress until after several steps had been taken, including the approval of the 14th Amendment. The 14th was designed to ensure that all former slaves were granted automatic United States citizenship, and that they would have all the rights and privileges as any other citizen. The amendment passed Congress on June 13, 1866, and was ratified on July 9, 1868 (757 days).
Online Professor said:
IMHO-14th Amendment gave the illusion of freeing the "slaves" and giving them rights of equality.
In reality it made all Citizens-slaves to the corporate government.
The second 13th Amendment did not free the slaves it merely transferred their ownership from the plantation owners to the Federal Government. The 14th Amendment did not elevate the freed slaves, it demoted everyone else from being sovereigns to being subjects.
Wayne Kline said:
If we can do this it will not matter all will be equal in OPPORTUNITY and the States will control how government interfaces with our individual lives.
http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/