[Publius]

I understand your strongly held opinions on this matter. But there are legal and political facts of life that may contravene your beliefs.

Political and Legal Fact of Life #1: If two-thirds of the states petition Congress for an Amendments Convention on a given subject, Congress absolutely will attempt to regulate the Convention using the precedents of Dillon v. Gloss and Coleman v. Miller. Congress will attempt to expand those precedents into granting itself wide latitude to regulate an Amendments Convention.

Political and Legal Fact of Life #2: At least one state will go to federal court to argue that Congress overstepped its bounds and trespassed on the prerogatives of the states. This case will make its way to the Supreme Court, and new precedent will be set.

I happen to agree with you and hope that Scalia writes the majority opinion in favor of the states, but it may go the other way. This is new territory for everybody.

[Jacquerie]

I gotta run right now and will respond to both of your thoughtful posts tomorrow.

[Jacquerie]

We'll see. Dillon and Coleman concerned congressionally derived amendments, a big difference. This isn't to say scotus won't butt into something it has no business in. Ask CA and prop 8.