Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Publius

I read most of the ABA review. The ruling class of 40 years ago argued the judiciary should be involved, and “one-man-one-vote” be the criteria for convention voting. Nonsense.


22 posted on 08/11/2013 12:04:38 PM PDT by Jacquerie (To restore the 10th Amendment, repeal the 17th.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Jacquerie
When I was editing the brief in Walker v. US in 1998-2000, I had an argument with Walker on this. He felt that the ABA Report was accurate in that Reynolds v. Sims -- the fabled "one man/one vote" decision -- did in fact apply. I argued that an Amendments Convention was such a primal act of the Republic that the Convention should be held under the "one state/one vote" rule used in 1787.

Starting in 1971, there were attempts by various people in Congress to enact legislation that would regulate the choosing of delegates and operation of an Amendments Convention. The ABA Report itself was a reaction to that state of affairs. The Supreme Court had ruled in Dillon v. Gloss (1921) and Coleman v. Miller (1939) that Congress had wide latitude in regulating the amendatory process, and this was Congress' attempt to exercise the powers granted by those decisions.

No bill ever got through both the House and Senate, and the last attempt to do so came from Sen. Orrin Hatch in 1991. Hatch was unable to get his bill out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and he hasn't re-introduced it since.

If 34 states request an Amendments Convention on any topic -- my favorite would be a Convention to repeal the 16th Amendment -- you can be sure that Hatch's old bill and others will come out of dusty filing cabinets and see the light of day. Once Congress decides to honor or not honor Reynolds v. Sims, you can be sure that the Supreme Court will have the last say as to whether Amendments Convention delegates should be based on population or by states. (Walker argued for both, using a model resembling the Electoral College.) The Court will also end up deciding whether the legislatures should appoint delegates or whether there should be elections for delegate positions. (If they rule for elections, I will run for the position of Convention Delegate from the 1st District of Georgia without hesitation.)

How will the Court decide? I would go for appointment by state legislature and the number of state delegates being immaterial because each state would only have one vote. But the arguments of the ABA Report strike me as being equally as good as my own. I wouldn't venture to predict the Court's ruling on that.

Reynolds v. Sims may apply after all.

23 posted on 08/11/2013 12:37:16 PM PDT by Publius (And so, night falls on civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson