| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | Next revisionBoth sides next revision |
| authoring:cospwiki:answers:the_crs_report_on_articlev [2015/10/28 20:57] – Oliver Wolcott | authoring:cospwiki:answers:the_crs_report_on_articlev [2015/10/28 21:03] – Oliver Wolcott |
|---|
| [[https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/conventionofstates/pages/145/attachments/original/1410016827/CRS-Response.pdf?1410016827|Download a PDF of this document here.]] | <WRAP round download 60%> |
| | [[https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/conventionofstates/pages/145/attachments/original/1410016827/CRS-Response.pdf?1410016827|PDF Download]] |
| | </WRAP> |
| |
| ======The Congressional Research Service Report on Article V====== | ======The Congressional Research Service Report on Article V====== |
| =====End Notes===== | =====End Notes===== |
| |
| 1. Thomas J. Neale, CRS Report R42592, The Article V Convention for Proposing Constitutional Amendments: Historical perspectives for Congress (Oct. 22, 2012). | <BOOKMARK:i>1. Thomas J. Neale, CRS Report R42592, The Article V Convention for Proposing Constitutional Amendments: Historical perspectives for Congress (Oct. 22, 2012). |
| |
| 2. Thomas J. Neale, CRS Report R42589, The Article V Convention to Propose Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary Issues for Congress (March 7, 2014). | <BOOKMARK:ii>2. Thomas J. Neale, CRS Report R42589, The Article V Convention to Propose Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary Issues for Congress (March 7, 2014). |
| |
| 3. Report R42589, supra, p. 4. | <BOOKMARK:iii>3. Report R42589, supra, p. 4. |
| |
| 4. Id. | <BOOKMARK:iv>4. Id. |
| |
| 5. Robert G. Natelson, "Proposing Constitutional Amendments by Convention: Rules Governing the Convention Process," 78 TENN. L. REV. 693, 740 (2011). | <BOOKMARK:v>5. Robert G. Natelson, "Proposing Constitutional Amendments by Convention: Rules Governing the Convention Process," 78 TENN. L. REV. 693, 740 (2011). |
| |
| 6. Id. | <BOOKMARK:vi>6. Id. |
| |
| 7. Id. (citing Dyer v. Blair, 390 F.Supp. 1291, 1307 (N.D. Ill. 1975) ("Article V identifies the body— either a legislature or a convention—which must ratify a proposed amendment. The act of ratification is an expression of consent to the amendment by that body. By what means that body shall decide to consent or not to consent is a matter for that body to determine for itself."). While Dyer addresses ratifying conventions, the same rule applies to a proposing convention. | <BOOKMARK:vii>7. Id. (citing Dyer v. Blair, 390 F.Supp. 1291, 1307 (N.D. Ill. 1975) ("Article V identifies the body— either a legislature or a convention—which must ratify a proposed amendment. The act of ratification is an expression of consent to the amendment by that body. By what means that body shall decide to consent or not to consent is a matter for that body to determine for itself."). While Dyer addresses ratifying conventions, the same rule applies to a proposing convention. |
| |
| 8. Id. See also Russell L. Caplan, CONSTITUTIONAL BRINKMANSHIP: AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION BY NATIONAL CONVENTION, 119-20 (1988). | <BOOKMARK:viii>8. Id. See also Russell L. Caplan, CONSTITUTIONAL BRINKMANSHIP: AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION BY NATIONAL CONVENTION, 119-20 (1988). |
| |
| 9. Id., at 741. | <BOOKMARK:ix>9. Id., at 741. |
| |
| |
| |
| |
