The fervor surrounding Trump’s Supreme Court pick is understandable: Over the last 100 years, the Supreme Court has rewritten the Constitution. What was once a short, simple document has become a 3,000-page tome empowering the Feds to dictate state and local policy. These decisions have done more to amend the Constitution than all of the official amendments combined.

That’s why people who object to an Article V Convention of States are working from a false assumption. They believe that the Constitution should be “left alone,” when in reality the courts have already altered our founding document beyond recognition. The court has given Washington almost unlimited power to rule and spend on any topic. It has empowered the executive to ignore the will of the people, and it’s empowered itself to “apply” the Constitution in ways that look more like legislation than adjudication.

The Convention of States Project doesn’t seek to alter the principles in the Constitution. Rather, we’re hoping to restore those principles. The Constitution imagines a limited federal government that can rule on a very select set of issues. All other matters should be left to the states and the people. Join us in support of an Article V Convention of States.

Michelle Davis

League City


(7) comments

Diane Turski

We are the United States of America, not a bunch of rogue elements. This "Convention of States" is actually a red herring attempt to subvert the Constitution. If convened, the members can change the Constitution to subvert the will of the people in all states, which is exactly what they plan to do. Don't fall for this ruse! Oppose the Convention of States!

Carlos Ponce

Interesting you should post this, Diane. Calling for a Convention of States is mentioned in Article 5 of the Constitution. But Liberals have been changing the Constitution through judicial overreach - not subject to the will of the people but to the whims of appointed judges. Which is better? The answer is obvious.
Article 5:
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; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Gary Miller

33 states needed to call a convention of states. 32 states are conservative, 18 are liberal. If 33 states were to call for a convention of states the 18 liberal states would be included. If after years of debate changes were offered for ratification all 50 states would vote. Ratification would require 33 states voting yes.

Gary Miller

Artical 5 supporters are conservatives who believe a convention of states could restore the constitution to it's original intent. A good plan that could go astray. There is no guarantee the changes would be better than what we have now. If a convention of states is convened liberals would be included in the amendments offered. Neither Conservatives or liberals would have the 3/4 of states needed to ratify the changes. I prefere the evolution of America that is restoring the constitution by election after election, judge by judge, state by state. Voting conservative restores the original constitution.

George Croix


George Croix

The first step in restoring Constitutional principals is to put people on the Supreme Court who will adjudicate, and not legislate.
Finding rights, or creating them, is not their job - deciding what rights exist as written is.
When Alexander Hamilton penned Federalist 85 he could not have imagined we'd have survived a Civil War as a nation, and would be ideologically close to a second one a century and a half later. Considering the extreme political polarization these days, the LAST thing we need is a bunch of totally one-sided 'delegates' from states getting together and deciding changes to the Constitution.
All previous Amendments have originated in Congress as one of the provisions of Article 5 provides. All of them.
There's a pretty good reason for that.

Gary Miller

In an earlier post I mis spoke. A convention of states requires 33 states voting for it. Amendments would require 38 states voting to approve, not 33 as I stated.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.