How can united states constitution be amended

Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, , and form what is known as the "Bill of Rights. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Ratified February 7, The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

Ratified June 15, But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.

But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. Ratified December 6, Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Ratified July 9, Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment. According to that section:. The Massachusetts Constitution can also be changed through a constitutional convention and subsequent ratification from the voters. There have been four constitutional conventions in Massachusetts:. The Michigan Constitution can be amended in these ways:.

The Minnesota Constitution can be amended via two different paths:. A unique feature of Minnesota's law is that the voter approval requirement for a revised constitution suggested by a constitutional convention is different from that of a constitutional amendment proposed by the legislature.

Ratification of amendments suggested by a convention require a 60 percent supermajority of those voting on the amendment question, while an amendment proposed by the legislature requires a simple majority of those voting in the election. The Mississippi Constitution can be amended via two different paths:. Mississippi is one of the few states that has no provision for a constitutional convention.

The Missouri Constitution can be amended via three different paths:. Votes on any proposed amendments to the state's constitution can take place at a general election or a special election. A unique feature of Missouri's law governing constitutional amendments is found in a provision in Section 2 b of Article XII , which states that proposed amendments should be published if possible "in two newspapers of different political faith in each county. The Montana Constitution can be amended through initiated constitutional amendments , legislatively referred constitutional amendments and constitutional conventions.

The Nevada Constitution can be amended via three different paths: a constitutional convention , a legislatively referred constitutional amendment or an initiated constitutional amendment. There are two paths to altering the New Hampshire Constitution : A legislatively referred constitutional amendment or a constitutional convention. There's only one way to amend the New Jersey Constitution , and that is through a legislatively referred constitutional amendment.

New Jersey is one of six states that has no provision for a constitutional convention. The New Mexico Constitution can be amended through a legislatively referred constitutional amendment or through a constitutional convention.

Moreover, although the New Mexico Constitution does not allow for initiated constitutional amendments , it contains a provision that pre-emptively limits what such amendments could do, if the citizens of the state were ever accorded that right, saying, "If this constitution be in any way so amended as to allow laws to be enacted by direct vote of the electors the laws which may be so enacted shall be only such as might be enacted by the legislature under the provisions of this constitution.

The New York Constitution can be amended through legislatively referred constitutional amendments or through constitutional conventions. The two paths to amending the North Carolina Constitution are the legislatively referred constitutional amendment and the constitutional convention process. There are three paths to amending the North Dakota Constitution : initiated constitutional amendments , legislatively referred constitutional amendments , and constitutional conventions.

The Ohio Constitution lays out three different paths, in two different articles, for how to go about changing the state's constitution. The Oklahoma Constitution lays out three different paths, in two different articles, for how to go about changing the state's constitution. The Oregon Constitution lays out four different paths, in two different articles, for how to go about changing the state's constitution.

The Pennsylvania Constitution is only explicit about one way to change the constitution, namely, the process of a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. The constitution does not lay out the rules for how a constitutional convention can be called, but the state has held five such conventions, most recently in when the current constitution was adopted.

Pennsylvania is one of the states that does not feature the power of initiated constitutional amendments. There are two paths by which the Rhode Island Constitution can be changed: the legislatively referred constitutional amendment and the constitutional convention.

Rhode Island residents do not have the power of initiated constitutional amendments. There are two paths to amending the South Carolina Constitution : legislatively referred constitutional amendments and constitutional conventions. Amendments to the South Dakota Constitution may be proposed in three different ways:. Whether proposed by initiative or by the state legislature, an amendment may amend one or more articles and related subject matter in other articles as necessary to accomplish the objectives of the amendment.

The Tennessee Constitution can be amended in two ways:. The Utah Constitution can be amended in two ways:. Although state citizens can collect signatures to qualify a proposed state statute for the ballot through an initiated state statute , the initiative power does not extend to constitutional amendments in Utah. Section 72 of the Vermont Constitution lays out the procedure governing changes to the Vermont Constitution. The Vermont Constitution, like that of several other states , does not provide for constitutional conventions.

Perhaps as a result, Vermont's current constitution is one of the oldest in the country, having been adopted in The Massachusetts Constitution is the only older constitution. Although there are no provisions in the state's constitution governing the calling of a constitutional convention, in , the Vermont State Legislature referred an advisory measure to the ballot which asked "Shall a Vermont Constitutional Convention be convened at the state house in Montpelier on October 6, to consider the following topics which shall receive a majority of the votes cast upon it in this election, and no others?

Vermont does not feature the power of initiative for either initiated state statutes or initiated constitutional amendments. The Virginia Constitution can be amended through two different paths:.

Virginia does not feature the power of initiative for either initiated constitutional amendments or initiated state statutes. The Washington State Constitution can be amended through two routes: [17]. Although Washington citizens can use the power of initiative to qualify initiated state statutes for the ballot, the power does not extend to constitutional amendments. The West Virginia Constitution can be modified through constitutional conventions and legislatively referred constitutional amendments.

None of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by constitutional convention. The Congress proposes an amendment in the form of a joint resolution.

Since the President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process, the joint resolution does not go to the White House for signature or approval.

The OFR adds legislative history notes to the joint resolution and publishes it in slip law format. The OFR also assembles an information package for the States which includes formal "red-line" copies of the joint resolution, copies of the joint resolution in slip law format, and the statutory procedure for ratification under 1 U. The Archivist submits the proposed amendment to the States for their consideration by sending a letter of notification to each Governor along with the informational material prepared by the OFR.

The amendment process, however, is not too strict to allow for constitutional change. It is true that the process does require amendments to be supported by a consensus. See John O. Rappaport, Originalism and the Good Constitution The problem is not that the constitutional amendment process requires a consensus but that the Supreme Court often intervenes before a consensus can emerge.

A consensus often takes a long time to develop. As a result, no amendment will be enacted, since the Court has already made a change. By contrast, if the original meaning were followed, the amendment process would have the opportunity to enact changes in the Constitution that are supported by a consensus.

This analysis helps to explain why so much constitutional change has occurred in the last three generations through judicial interpretation rather than the amendment process. For example, during the New Deal, the Roosevelt Administration did not attempt to pass constitutional amendments to give the federal government more regulatory power.

Instead, it attempted to pack the Supreme Court. There seems little doubt that the nation would have supported an amendment that conferred additional regulatory powers, but there is a good chance that the consensus requirement would have meant the federal government would have received less power than the Court eventually granted it.

A second problem with the amendment system is that its current operation is biased in favor of the federal government. The Constitution provides two methods for proposing amendments. While all of the existing amendments have been enacted through the congressional proposal method, in which two-thirds of each House of Congress proposes an amendment, no amendment has ever passed through the convention method.

Under that method, two-thirds of the state legislatures can apply for Congress to call a convention that would then decide whether to propose an amendment.

The convention method was an essential part of the original Constitution. The drafters of the Constitution recognized that the congressional proposal method was controlled by the federal government. Consequently, it could not be relied upon to reform federal governmental abuses. The drafters therefore placed the convention method into the Constitution, since this method largely bypasses the federal government. Michael B. Commentary 53 Unfortunately, this amendment method is broken.

Many people who favor constitutional amendments that would limit the federal government are nonetheless unwilling to use this method, because they fear what is called a runaway convention—a convention that is called to propose amendments on one subject but then proposes them on other matters. For example, state legislatures might apply for a convention to pass a balanced budget amendment, but the convention might then decide to propose an amendment allowing school prayer.

This fear of a runaway convention has hobbled the convention method. Some of these amendments, however, would probably have been enacted under a functioning convention method. Many constitutional commentators have argued that a runaway convention is constitutional. In their view, the Constitution does not allow the states to limit the convention to a particular subject and therefore the convention is free to make proposals on any subject of its choosing.

But this argument is mistaken. Thus, a limited convention is one of the conventions for which the states can apply. If the original meaning were widely accepted, states could feel free to apply for a limited convention without fear of a runaway convention. This arrangement would eliminate the national government bias in the current operation of the amendment process.