LWVUS Constitutional Amendments Study Resources
On Friday, November 13, 2015, members of the COAST and CAPO League of Women Voters will
meet to answer the Consensus Questions which have been posed for us by the League of Women
Voters of the United States.
This Resource Document contains many links to documents you may wish to consult as you prepare
for the Consensus Meeting – you will recognize them because wherever there is a link the text is
blue and underlined. If you “float” you cursor over the text the link appears, and pressing the “Ctrl”
key and clicking will take you to the document.
Here is how the National Study Committee describes the work we are doing, taken from the
Constitutional Amendment Study Guide which they developed.
“This study of amending the U.S. Constitution is in three parts. The questions in Part I are to develop
guidelines for evaluating constitutional amendment proposals. Part II asks about aspects of an
Article V Constitutional Convention that may be important in conducting such a Convention. Part III
relates to how the League might put these guidelines into practice and asks two overall balancing
questions between process and positions (Study Guide, p. 1).”
Constitutional Background:
“In 1787, delegates from twelve of the thirteen states then in existence met in Philadelphia to revise
the Articles of Confederation. Instead, they drafted a totally new document, what we know as the
U.S. Constitution. It was unanimously ratified by the states. While this all seems very long ago, how
the Constitution began and how the 1787 Convention was convened and conducted are cited in the
current debate about calling a Convention under Article V.
Here’s what Article V of the U.S. Constitution says about amending the Constitution:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose
amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of
the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case,
shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the
legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof,
as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; . . .
So Article V provides two ways of proposing amendments to the nation’s fundamental charter.
Congress, by a two-thirds vote of both chambers, may propose constitutional amendments to the
states for ratification. OR, the legislatures of two-thirds of the states (34 at present) may ask
Congress to call a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution; this is commonly called
an Article V Convention. Amendments proposed by either method must be ratified by three-fourths
of the states, 38 at present.
The first method has been used by Congress to submit 33 amendments to the states, beginning with
the Bill of Rights. Of these, 27 were approved; 26 are currently in effect, while one – the 18th
Amendment (Prohibition) — was ultimately repealed by a second amendment, the 21st. The 21st
Amendment was also the only one ratified by conventions in the states, rather than by state
Document1
1
legislatures. In June 1920, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the U.S. Constitution
provided for state legislatures, not citizen referendum campaigns, to ratify amendments.
The second method, an Article V Convention, has never been successfully invoked (Study Guide,
p.1). ”
League Background:
“Perhaps it goes without saying that the League of Women Voters believes it is right and
permissible to amend the Constitution of the United States when circumstances demand. The
League was born from the successful, decades-long effort to pass the 19th Amendment.
The question for us today is: what are the shared values and beliefs within the League – what
consensus do we have – regarding the circumstances that might allow or compel the League to
endorse a constitutional amendment or an Article V Convention?
If we do find that we have consensus on some of the principles that should guide us, mobilizing the
organization to advocacy for or against a particular amendment would fall under the established
protocol by which the League determines its advocacy agenda, as laid out in Impact on Issues.
We might support an amendment that was in concert with League positions, but we might not
support every amendment that was in concert with League positions. In other words, having a
position on the issue is necessary but might not be sufficient for the League to endorse a
constitutional amendment.
The first question to ask is whether League positions support the proposed amendment, but even if
the answer is an unqualified “yes,” we need to examine other factors. The remainder of this Guide
helps frame the discussion of those other factors (Study Guide, p.2). ”
Consensus Questions: As noted above, the Consensus Questions are divided into
three Parts. For each of the three Parts, the National Study Committee has selected some
background readings which they describe as Foundation Readings. In addition, there are Specific
References for each question or sub-question.
Below you will find links to the Foundation Readings for each of the three Parts of the Study,
followed by a detailed list of “Specific References” for each Question, with their associated links,
with page number references for each question or sub-question.
Here is a link to the Constitutional Amendment Consensus Questions themselves.
Additional Background Readings Suggested by the
COAST/CAPO Study Team:
LWVUS Review of Constitutional Amendments Proposed in Response to Citizen's United
Celebrate Constitution's Legacy of Interpretation, Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the
University of California Irvine School of Law
Document1
2
LWV Constitutional Amendments Study: Foundation Readings
and Specific References for Consensus Questions
LWV Constitution Study: Resources for Consensus Questions
#
Question
1
Which of these should or
should not be a consideration
in identifying an appropriate
and well-crafted amendment?
Resource
#
Pgs

“Great and Extraordinary Occasions:
Developing Guidelines for Constitutional
Change

Synopsis of “Constitutional Amendmentitis”
by Kathleen Sullivan.

Synopsis of "Constitutional Amendmentitis
and the Constitutional Common Law"
1

"When the Supreme Court is this wrong, it's
time to overrule them"
2

“Great and Extraordinary Occasions:
Developing Guidelines for Constitutional
Change pp. 1-11
11

“Great and Extraordinary Occasions:
Developing Guidelines for Constitutional
Change pp. 19-20
2

"The Missing Right to Vote"
Whether the amendment
would either make our
political system more
democratic or protect
individual rights.

“Great and Extraordinary Occasions:
Developing Guidelines for Constitutional
Change pp. 11-14
4
1d Whether the policy objective
can be achieved by a
legislative or political
approach that is less difficult
than a constitutional
amendment.

“Great and Extraordinary Occasions:
Developing Guidelines for Constitutional
Change pp. 14-17
4
1a
Whether the public policy
objective addresses matters
of such acute and abiding
importance that the
fundamental charter of our
nation must be changed.
1b Whether the amendment as
written would be effective in
achieving its policy objective.
1c
Document1
3
61
1
#
1e
Question
Resource
Whether the public policy
objective is more suited to a
constitutional and general
approach than to a statutory
and detailed approach.

What conditions should or
should not be in place for an
Article V Constitutional
Convention initiated by the
states?
#
Pgs
“Great and Extraordinary Occasions:
Developing Guidelines for Constitutional
Change pp. 27-30.
U.S. Constitution - annotated by Justice
Stevens
4

"The Article V Convention to Propose
Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary
Issues for Congress"“ "The Article V
Convention for Proposing Constitutional
Amendments: Historical Perspectives"
46

"Amending the Constitution through
Convention"
The Convention must be
transparent and not
conducted in secret.

"The Quartet: The Constitution's Gang of
Four" , pg. 4
1
2b Representation at the
Convention must be based on
population rather than one
state, one vote.

"Amending the Constitution through
Convention" p. 3
1

"The Article V Convention for Proposing
Constitutional Amendments: Historical
Perspectives" pp. 38 & 40.
2
2a
2c

3
State delegates must be

elected rather than appointed.
"Amending the Constitution through
Convention" p. 3
1

"Amending the Constitution through
Convention"
1

"The Article V Convention for Proposing
Constitutional Amendments: Historical
Perspectives" page 3.
2d Voting at the Convention
must be by delegate, not by
state.
Document1
4
1
#
Question
Resource
#
Pgs

"The Article V Convention to Propose
Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary
Issues for Congress"“ page 20-26

Neale, Historical Perspectives pp. 16-18
Only state resolutions on a
single topic count when
determining if a Convention
must be called.

"The Article V Convention to Propose
Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary
Issues for Congress"“ page 20-26

"The Article V Convention for Proposing
Constitutional Amendments: Historical
Perspectives" pages 16-18.
2g
The validity of state “calls” for
an Article V Constitutional
Convention must be
determined by the most
recent action of the state. If a
state has enacted a rescission
of its call, that rescission
should be respected by
Congress.

"The Article V Convention for Proposing
Constitutional Amendments: Historical
Perspectives" pages 19-21.
10
3
Should the League oppose an
Article V Constitutional
Convention to propose
amendments to the U.S.
Constitution because of
unresolved questions about
the powers and processes of
such a convention?

"Proposing Constitutional Amendments by
a Convention of the States: A Handbook for
State Lawmakers"
42

"States Likely Could Not Control
Constitutional Convention on Balanced
Budget Amendment or Other Issues"
Should the League consider
supporting a Constitutional
amendment that will advance
a League position even if:

The National Study Committee did not have
Foundation Readings or Specific References
for this question. However, the
Bibliography for Part III (Questions 4a and
2e
2f
4
The Convention must be
limited to a specific topic.
Document1
5
7
2
7
3
10
#
4a
Question
There are significant
problems with the actual
amendment as proposed?
Resource
4b) includes Great and Extraordinary
Occasions; reading pp 1-27 can help inform
our thinking on this question.
4b It is being put forward by a
procedural process the
League would otherwise
oppose?
Document1
6
#
Pgs