blog:how_the_judiciary_s_decision_shed_light_on_the_federal_amendments_convention
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Last revisionBoth sides next revision | |||
blog:how_the_judiciary_s_decision_shed_light_on_the_federal_amendments_convention [2015/12/24 23:32] – created Oliver Wolcott | blog:how_the_judiciary_s_decision_shed_light_on_the_federal_amendments_convention [2015/12/25 00:15] – Oliver Wolcott | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
- | //**The following article is the fourth edition of a 6-part series by Prof. Robert Natelson addressing conventions for proposing constitutional amendments. Prof. Natelson retired a few years ago from the University of Montana School of Law and is now senior fellow in constitutional jurisprudence at the Independence Institute; his work has been cited in five Supreme Court cases since 2013. **// | + | //**The following article is the fourth edition of a 6-part series by Prof. Robert Natelson addressing conventions for proposing constitutional amendments. Prof. Natelson retired a few years ago from the University of Montana School of Law and is now senior fellow in constitutional jurisprudence at the Independence Institute; his work has been cited in five Supreme Court cases since 2013. **// |
+ | [ [[blog: | ||
Although there has not been a convention for proposing amendments, there has been a considerable amount of other amendment activity. Disputes arising from this activity have produced a series of reported court decisions interpreting Article V. | Although there has not been a convention for proposing amendments, there has been a considerable amount of other amendment activity. Disputes arising from this activity have produced a series of reported court decisions interpreting Article V. |
blog/how_the_judiciary_s_decision_shed_light_on_the_federal_amendments_convention.txt · Last modified: 2021/02/23 16:14 by 127.0.0.1