A behind-the-scenes effort to force Congress to call a convention to amend the Constitution could end up helping Trump in his push to expand presidential power. @phoebepetrovic.bsky.social explains:
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Common sense says that once a convention has been convened and the issues at hand to date have been settled, the clock re-sets and petitions for a constitutional convention must be refiled.
The most recent amendment was in 1992. Conceivably they could go back that far.
Using Wisconsin’s 1929 petition is not a great example because WI’s Repub-dominated state legislature voted in a new Article V resolution in 2022 as part of the “fiscal restraints on the federal government” movement. Go here & scroll 2010-2024 to see them all https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_applications_for_an_Article_V_Convention
The Convention of States Movement is closely aligned with the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025. If they can’t dismantle the federal govt from above, they’ll do it from below.
And check out all the Trump cabinet members that endorse COS: https://conventionofstates.com/endorsements
Musk has said he wants to delegate all power to the executive, gut all regulations, realign the US with new geopolitical allies outside of NATO, privatize all gov functions/ replace all gov workers w/ private sector employees & delete entire agencies to do it.
Musk is NO fan of the Constitution.
Trying to get sympathy so people won't sell their Tesla stocks & have to face stockholders' wrath.
My father always used to say to us...
"If you're looking for sympathy, you can find it in the dictionary- between "shit" & "syphilis."
This is a very bad development. Beware of any major change to the constitution under Trump it’s only being done to make him a bigger dictator than he already is and to reduce the rights of ordinary Americans.
I’m cool with a convention if it adds a rule that you can’t have a felony and hold any or even one office. Also, what if they made a position adjacent to the President that gave power to the person who took second place in a presidential race? Checking, balancing, weakening federal power.
Yes. I also understand that having a felony restricts one’s freedom and historically there are so many errors made in prosecution like people receiving a death sentence in error. I would only want this to remove the current president and that’s not so smart. It was on my mind after Nov 2024.
Ron DeSantis has been pushing for this for over a year now. That "freedom caucus" crap is trying to get DJT everything he wants, just like they did 10 years ago.
Prefer how a push to amend the constitution could mark the beginning of a civil war. Suggest they try it, we will surround their mansions, beach houses and paddle out to their yachts. It happened once, it may just happen again.
A constitutional convention would open a Pandora’s box, and the final step in tearing this country apart. It would leave T and oligarchs to pick up the pieces and leave nearly everyone powerless.
50÷4=12.5x3=37.5 or 37 states required to ratify any Constitutional Amendment.
Ironic that 13 states can keep this country from once again becoming a Monarchy.
Right-wingers have been salivating to have a Constitutional Convention for many, many years. It would truly be the end of this nation. Check out the Sheriffs group that supports this, see if yours is a member.
The only, and I mean only valid recourse if a ConCon is called is for the blue states to decline to be in any new union with the red.
There would be no way to prevent the red states from simply dictating the contents of any new such document, if each state got an equal say in it like last time.
Rethugs only have control in 28 states. They cannot get enough states to ratify any proposals out of a convention. They don’t even have enough to call for a convention, which is why they are using resolutions from the 1770s to claim they do.
Having said that, that is now my preferred solution. Let’s finally end this nonsense that has been going on for over 2 centuries, and get rid of the deadweight.
Remember that the Philadelphia Convention was called to make limited amendments to the Articles of Confederation. Instead, they scrapped the Articles and started from scratch.
There is nothing to limit the scope of a constitutional convention.
The AoC required ALL states to agree on anything. They did.
This Constitution requires 2/3 of states to request one (and that is going to be court case in itself, because many have rescinded standing requests), AND court cases to determine what it would look like, procedures, who would be
A convention is where the states can part ways as well. If the red states force it, the blue states should consider forming a new union to save our democracy.
Absolutely not. Definitely should not happen under this admin. While crooks are in power, any change that happens will only be for their benefit and for entrenching themselves in power.
Comments
The most recent amendment was in 1992. Conceivably they could go back that far.
And check out all the Trump cabinet members that endorse COS: https://conventionofstates.com/endorsements
Musk is NO fan of the Constitution.
My father always used to say to us...
"If you're looking for sympathy, you can find it in the dictionary- between "shit" & "syphilis."
A lot of people get felony charges and turn their lives around (or are subject to political prosecution by the police state).
This government wants to make protesting against Elon and Tesla a felony.
Heck, Eugene Debbs was in prison on a trumped up
No, there needs to be a better distinction between {everything else} and {oversaw an attempted violent coup}
do you seriously think a nip & tuck is the "answer?"
Ironic that 13 states can keep this country from once again becoming a Monarchy.
There would be no way to prevent the red states from simply dictating the contents of any new such document, if each state got an equal say in it like last time.
Remember that the Philadelphia Convention was called to make limited amendments to the Articles of Confederation. Instead, they scrapped the Articles and started from scratch.
There is nothing to limit the scope of a constitutional convention.
And, AGAIN, 3/4 of states would be required to ratify any amendments.
This Constitution requires 2/3 of states to request one (and that is going to be court case in itself, because many have rescinded standing requests), AND court cases to determine what it would look like, procedures, who would be
They are not going to add amendments to the Constitution. There is no path to doing so.
That is not what you need to worry about. What you need to worry about is what they do when trying to use the Constitution fails.