Principles Governing the Interpretation and Exercise of Article v pOwers

A* MENDMENTS to the United States Constitution have been few and far between. Since its ratification in 1789, the Constitution has undergone only twenty-six amendments. Ten of these, known collectively as the Bill of Rights, were ratified in 1791. Article V of the Constitution provides for two alternatives for proposing amendments.' Either the Congress, upon two-thirds of both houses deeming it necessary, or a Convention, called by Congress upon receipt of applications from two-thirds of the states, may propose amendments. All twenty-six amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by Congress. Although several applications for a Convention have been submitted by various states2 the necessary two-thirds to effect the calling has at no time been obtained.3 Disagreement among constitutional scholars as regards the role of Congress and the states in calling a Convention may, in part, be attributable to the desuetude of this procedure. Moreover, this issue has never been presented to the United States Supreme Court for adjudication. Consequently, questions concerning the calling of a Convention have yet to be answered authoritatively. But this is true only in regard to the particulars. Broad principles governing the amendment process in general are discernible in several Supreme Court decisions dealing with Article V. Furthermore, the historical evidence which is available serves to provide some indication of the Framers' intentions as regards the constitutional function of the states, the Congress, and the Convention, respectively, in the process for proposing amendments. These two threads, relevant Supreme Court decisions and historical data, when pulled through the eye of common sense, seam the fabric on which the details of embroidery must be stitched.