![]() Nobody thinks the guys drafting the Constitution in 1787 were clairvoyant about the problems we would face in 2022. It’s become harder to amend the Constitution even as it has become ever more important that we amend it. The most recent amendment - the 27th, which prevents a congressional pay raise from going into effect until after the next congressional election - was actually proposed with the Bill of Rights and took an impressive 202-year ratification period to finally get enough state votes to become part of the Constitution in 1992. The other 12 were all ratified in the 20th century. The three civil rights amendments were made following the Civil War, and ratification by the rebelling states was required for reentry into the Union. The next two - protecting states from lawsuits and electing the president and vice president as a ticket - were ratified within a few years. The first 10 - the Bill of Rights - happened almost immediately. Over half of the Constitution’s amendments were made in the first third of our country’s existence. In today’s dysfunctional Congress, garnering two-thirds support for anything of is a laughable notion. But it has also become increasingly difficult of late. Of the nearly 11,000 Constitutional amendments that have been proposed over the past 233 years, only 27 have made it through. And in a country of 330 million people, that means that, in theory, 96 percent of us could have to agree to change the Constitution - that is, if all the least populous states don’t vote in favor of an amendment. The smallest 12 states comprise roughly 14 million people. Of course, our population isn’t evenly divided across the states. In short, 38 state legislatures have to ratify an amendment after it is proposed either by 67 senators and 288 house members or 34 states. The resulting constitutional stagnation is a threat to the Republic - one that should scare you even if you think the Supreme Court has gotten every decision right (narrator: it hasn’t).Īrticle V of the Constitution explains how to amend our shared governing contract. And, of course, Thomas Jefferson would later tout the necessity of changes to the Constitution by successive generations: “We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”īut today, thanks in large part to growing negative partisanship and shrinking Congressional interest in doing anything, the amendment process has been relegated to the dust heap while our national problems - from climate change to an outdated immigration system - pile up without political accountability. George Washington dedicated a good chunk of his first inaugural address to the subject of amendments. In fact, they ratified the document with many of the amendments that would become the Bill of Rights already in mind. Our Founders designed the Constitution so that amending it would be hard, but not impossible. For months, they heard testimony and circulated drafts on adding justices to the court, 18-year term limits for justices, stripping the court of jurisdiction to hear certain types of cases, requiring a supermajority of justices to overturn acts of Congress - any of which could dramatically change our constitutional order.Īnd yet their final report was met with a collective yawn by all but the most ardent court followers. Created in response to continued criticisms of the court’s conservative decisions and President Donald Trump’s three appointments, this group of 34 of our country’s brightest legal minds considered proposals to fundamentally alter the third branch of our government. President Joe Biden’s Supreme Court Commission ended with more whimper than bang. She is a contributing editor at Politico Magazine. Sarah Isgur was Justice Department spokeswoman during the Trump administration and is the host of the legal podcast Advisory Opinions for the Dispatch.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |