Action 129: Say NO to a Constitutional Convention

Background:

A resolution (SP 705) calling for a national convention under Article V of the Constitution was proposed in the Maine legislature in 2023. On February 2, 2024, it was defeated by the Maine senate and placed in the “dead file”. The title was “JOINT RESOLUTION MAKING SEPARATE APPLICATIONS TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES CALLING CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS TO CONSIDER REPRESENTATIONAL INTEGRITY AND PROPOSE AMENDMENTS ESTABLISHING TERM LIMITS FOR CONGRESS AND ADDRESSING CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM”.  It was a bipartisan bill, sponsored by Billy Bob Faulkingham and Nicole Grohoski, among others (1, 2).

Clearly campaign finance reform is a good idea especially in the wake of Citizens United (3) -which is probably why some of the sponsors of SP 705 were Democrats.  Although it’s now recognized that the dangers of a constitutional convention are great, it’s not a dead issue.  The Trump coup plotters clearly want to do away with the pesky Constitution we have, and replace it with something else more to their liking, i.e. something more authoritarian (4). The well-funded, right-wing, dark-money group Convention of States is the main driver of the movement for a constitutional convention. Their website has a populist vibe (5).  The group’s President, Mark Meckler, co-founded the “Tea Party Patriots.” Its chairman and senior advisers are a smattering of the far-right fringe of the Republican party: including former GOP senators Rick Santorum and Jim DeMint. Its endorsers include the president of the Heritage Foundation, Ron DeSantis, Mark Meadows, Vivek Ramaswamy, Sean Hannity, Greg Abbott, Rand Paul, Ben Shapiro, Mark Robinson, Charlie Kirk, Chip Roy, and Sarah Palin (6).  

Common Cause, co-leading the National Defend Our Constitution coalition (7), points out “there are no guardrails in place to ensure an orderly course for an Article V convention. Any Article V convention, regardless of the stated purpose going in, runs the risk of becoming a runaway convention. There is no saying what could happen to any of our rights or what could be traded in an exchange between special interests—who will most definitely have their hands in the process. There is no predicting what could happen and far too many open-ended questions for this to be a good idea.” (8)

Article V was included in our Constitution because of the founders’ realization that future generations may desire changes.  They provided a process that intentionally set a high bar for amendments.  There are two pathways to achieve an amendment: the first involves a vote of 2/3 of both houses of Congress and ratification by ¾ of the states. Since 1788, the Constitution has been amended 27 times, including the first 10 amendments in the Bill of Rights. All the amendments were passed by this first pathway.

The second pathway involves a constitutional convention. Article V states that when the Legislatures of 2/3 of the states make an application to Congress, it shall “call a Convention for proposing amendments”, which still need to be ratified by ¾ of the state legislatures or by State constitutional conventions.   There have been previous efforts to call a constitutional convention, but they haven’t come to fruition.  But this time we are dangerously close.  Now that we have 50 states, the Article V Constitutional Convention alternative requires 34 states’ legislatures to call for a convention. At present, 28 have done so.  There’s a map (7).

As constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe has noted, the language regarding how to implement a constitutional convention is "dangerously vague.” “The founding document does not say whether 34 states need to agree on the specific amendment topic or whether signaling that they want a convention for any reason is enough to trigger proceedings. There is no explanation of whether each state at the convention would get one vote or more, whether topics not on the agenda can be raised, whether lobbyists or special interest groups could participate, or who would referee disagreements. Constitutional scholars are unclear how even the most basic questions would be resolved.”  (9)

Action:  Be aware of forthcoming attempts to hoodwink us into acquiescing to a Constitutional Convention.  Let our legislators know you oppose it.  Amendments should be made through the normal process that has been used for the past 237 years.  If you have any influence in any of the states that have passed a resolution like the one in Maine’s “dead file”, ask them to work to rescind it. And keep SP 705 in its coffin!

Urgency:  As the coup continues to falter, we can expect loyalists to try to change the rules of the game, including going so far as to call for a Constitutional Convention.  Alert all your legislators soon, to be aware of this possibility and most definitely oppose it, when (not if) this monster surfaces.

Note: Research and most of the writing for this Action Item were by Mary Hennessy, vice chair, Brooksville Democratic Committee.  We welcome your submittals for this Rapid Response effort!

Extra Credit:

(1) https://legiscan.com/ME/bill/SP0705/2023
(2) text of the resolution: https://legislature.maine.gov/legis/bills/getPDF.asp?paper=SP0705&item=1&snum=131
(3) https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained
(4) Stewart, Katherine: Money, Lies and God – Inside the Movement to Destroy American Democracy. Published February 2025, discussed on WhoWhatWhy Podcast May 16, https://whowhatwhy.org/podcast/hijacking-america-the-silent-coalition-behind-democracys-decline/
(5) https://conventionofstates.com
(6) See https://carolinaforward.org/blog/convention-states-scam/
(7) https://defendourconstitution.org
(8)https://www.commoncause.org/resources/constitutional-chaos-the-shadow-campaigns-aiming-to-unravel-our-freedom/.
(9) https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/16/us/a-constitutional-convention-some-democrats-fear-its-coming.html