The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: A state may not de-ratify an amendment to the Constitution.

(See in situ)

A state may not de-ratify an amendment to the Constitution.

Once a state has ratified an amendment to the constitution it is bound by that decision for all eternity. The only way to reverse the mistake is to ratify another amendment repealing the previous one like with the 18th Amendment establishing Prohibition and the 21st which repealed it.
Since states exercising the right to leave the Union will be met with violence, there are three other ways to get rid of the 16th and 17th Amendments.
1) Congress votes to send repeal amendments to the states and 3/4 ratify them.
2) An Article V convention is called at the request of 2/3 of the state legislatures; The convention votes to send repeal amendments to the states and 3/4 of the states ratify them.
3) The government collapses, either in violence, or peacefully, and it is replaced, along with the Constitution.

A state cannot say "No" after it said "Yes."

This article says 5 states are needed to de-ratify. That is wrong. States can't say "just kidding" after voting to ratify an amendment to the Constitution.

I believe, if I remember right, only three more states are needed to get an Article V convention called. There is a question on whether a state can say "just kidding" after it adds its voice to a call for an Article V convention. If it can, then more states will be needed to call for a convention to propose amendments.

The writer of the article says "The problem with the second method (an Article V convention) is the lack of control that might be exhibited by the delegates to the Constitutional Convention. A group intent on radically changing our Constitution could do away with many protections we enjoy today or grant certain offices or persons in government additional powers and authority never intended. Even though any proposed amendment proceeding forth would still have to be ratified by three-fourths of all the states to become part of the constitution, the danger to this republic is unknown."

I think, given the current state and trajectory of "this republic," this is a risk worth taking.

[F]orce can only settle questions of power, not of right. - Clyde N. Wilson