Posted on 06/26/2015 2:15:23 PM PDT by cotton1706
Article V!
That depends on the delegates that are elected by the states, and on what those delegates intend to accomplish, and on how little they fear for safety of their families. Governments have an excellent track record in controlling a well defined, small group of people.
I can't believe that all 50 states intend to send disrupters to the Convention.
...and on how little they fear for safety of their families. Governments have an excellent track record in controlling a well defined, small group of people.
That is an extremist argument that supposes that the federal government will take hostage the families of Convention delegates as coercive leverage. Is that really what you think is capable from Boehner, McConnell, McCain, Hatch, Graham, et. al.?
-PJ
The key is to make any provision self-enforcing. Ted Cruz proposes an amendment to have the justices of SCOTUS serve during good behavior - as judged by a majority of the national popular vote and of the popular vote by state. If a justice fails to win a majority of the national popular vote and fails to win a majority in a majority of the states, he’s out. His proposal is that this “good behavior check” (my term) be applied to each justice on the second presidential election after his nomination, and every 8 years thereafter.I suppose that is good; if you were willing to make SCOTUS appointees be the centerpiece of the elections, you could have it that their reconfirmation elections would be in non-presidential years. Which might fire up turnout in off-year elections, for good or for ill.
How to nullify the Obamacare and Gay Marriage decisions.
At the Convention of States (as proposed by Mark Levin) pass a constitutional amendment that empowers any state to nullify within that state part or all of any judicial decision that fails to conform to the plain language of either the Constitution or Federal law. Such nullification would have to pass the state legislature and be signed into law by the governor.
Should a simple majority of the states pass nullification legislation then that judicial ruling would be nullified in all the states. Since Appellate and Supreme Court decisions are based on a simple majority therefore a greater burden should not apply to the states.
Currently SCOTUS operates as an unelected super legislature without constraints. If they knew that their rulings were subject to state review then maybe some balance would descend upon their deliberations.
Thomas Jefferson in 1798 argued on behalf of state nullification and this would finally create that capability.
We as a people, the president and the congress should ignore the SC and it’s words. All they have is their words. They have no authority to attack us, arrest us or prosecute us without our permission. They do not control any federal law enforcement agency, all they have is their words and when we ignore their words they have nothing.
I will ignore them, they have proven to not deserve the respect they have received for over 200 years, they have no honor.
They decide nothing. But will "the system" try to disrupt the Convention? That depends only on how dangerous it ends up to be. You can bet that there will be attempts to sabotage and/or control the process at every stage. The history of 20th century shows that governments are capable of much worse acts than arranging for a few hundred phone calls.
Would you grant that the delegates to a CoS would know this, and take pains to not forward to the states any amendment that is not solid in its structure?I can't grant you anything anymore than you can grant me anything on what someone else would do or know.
To do so, something much more substantive than a clarification on a rewrite (not repeal) would be expected?An amendment can't be rewritten (wording clarified) without repealing the previous amendment... I thought you being an Article V advocate would at least know that.
That's why they're calling for THE REPEAL of the 17th amendment. It can't be repealed without a new amendment.
The 21st amendment repealed the 18th amendment. The 18th amendment didn't just get erased off the page, it's still there.
Then so be it... That’s not a reason NOT to try what the founders gave us as a peaceful method to change things...
If that happens, then we have the moral authority to proceed down other paths...
Doing nothing has worked out so well. /sarc
That is flawed logic...
So you are then OK with DC ignoring the Heller decision? I suspect not since that one went “our way”...
You must be an anarchist...
The first thing an Art V CoS should do is make Art V CoS mandatory every 5 years.
No, not at all. You need to take reading comprehension again.
A convention can only propose amendments, not ratify them - but an amendment could actually name the justices of SCOTUS explicitly. IMHO.
I comprehend just fine...
Go ahead an ignore what you don’t like... Good luck with that...
I am and I plan to continue.
Did you say you are a democrat?
Hmmm... After reading through a few of your recent posts, it appears you’d like us to all be just like Obama and simply ignore what we don’t like...
Democrat indeed... Your progressive slip is showing...
Ohio would send one delegate.
Fine. Who? Who do you think a committee made up of Kasich, DeWine, and a few other GOPe power brokers would send?
We have been fighting with the Queensberry rules for decades and it is obviously not working. Time to fight fire with fire and quit being good guys.
Now if you do not like it you can go back to Democratie Underground and tell your buddies hell is coming and he is bringing some friends.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.