HIGH ALERT: We Need Help in EVERY state, especially the Heartland,
to Defend our Constitution
and Defeat the Convention of States!
Reasons against a Convention of States a.k.a. Article V Amendments Convention a.k.a. Constitutional Convention
1) Barry Goldwater said: “[I am] totally opposed [to a Constitutional Convention]…We may wind up with a Constitution so far different from that we have lived under for two hundred years that the Republic might not be able to continue.”
2) Chief Justice Warren Burger said: “There is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the convention would obey. After a convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don’t like its agenda. The meeting in 1787 ignored the limit placed by the confederation Congress “for the sole and express purpose.”
3) With George Washington as chairman, they were able to deliberate in total secrecy, with no press coverage and no leaks. A Constitutional Convention today would be a free-for-all for special interest groups, television coverage, and press speculation.
Reason why we must NOT promote or endorse a Convention of States (COS) / Article V Amendment Convention:
There is no provision in Article V empowering state legislators to choose the delegates to a Constitutional Convention or to “limit” the scope of a Con-Con. There are no rules, no regulations or instructions, and once a Convention of this type is underway, the delegates answer to NOBODY!
According to Corpus Juris Secundum 16 C.J.S. 9
The members of a Constitutional Convention are the direct representatives of the people and, as such,
they may exercise all sovereign powers that are vested in the people of the state.
The members of a Constitutional Convention are the direct representatives of the people, and as such
(1) They may exercise all sovereign powers that are vested in the people of the state.
(2) They derive their powers not from the legislature, but from the people.
(3) Their power may not in any respect be limited or restrained by the legislature.
(4) Under this view, it is a Legislative Body of the Highest Order and may not only frame, but mayalso enact and promulgate.
(1) Mississippi (1892) Sproule v. Fredericks; 11 So. 472
(2) Iowa (1883) Koehler v. Hill; 14 N.W. 738
(3) West Virginia (1873) Loomis v. Jackson; 6 W. Va. 613
(4) Oklahoma (1907) Frantz v. Autry; 91 p. 193
(5) Texas (1912) Cox v. Robison; 150 S.W. 1149