Amending The Constitution: Ratification Requirements

The process of amending the US Constitution is outlined in Article V of the Constitution. The process is deliberately challenging and time-consuming, with the Constitution being amended only 27 times since it was drafted in 1787. The first step in the process is for Congress to propose an amendment, which requires a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Once an amendment is proposed, it must be ratified by three-fourths of the states (38 out of 50 states) to become part of the Constitution. This can be done through a vote of the state legislatures or a state convention, with Congress determining the mode of ratification. The process also allows for an alternative method of proposing amendments, where two-thirds of the state legislatures can request a constitutional convention to propose amendments. However, this method has never been utilized. The amendment process also includes ceremonial functions, with dignitaries, including the President, witnessing the certification of amendments.

Explore related products

Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788

$13.2 $24

Ratification of the Twenty-First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States [1938]: State Convention Records and Laws

$29.95 $123

Encyclopedia of Constitutional Amendments, Proposed Amendments, and Amending Issues, 1789-2023

$239.99 $243

Responding to Imperfection - The Theory and Practice of Constitutional Amendment

$37.62 $75

The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, Volume 41: Bill of Rights, No. 5 (Volume 41)

$95

The Reconstruction Amendments: The Essential Documents (Volume 2)

$64.99 $101.99

The role of the Archivist of the United States

Ratifying an amendment to the US Constitution requires three-fourths of the states (38 out of 50) to approve the proposed amendment. The Archivist of the United States plays a crucial role in this process, as they are responsible for administering the ratification process and issuing a certificate proclaiming the amendment duly ratified.

Now, onto the role of the Archivist of the United States:

The Archivist of the United States is the head and chief administrator of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). They are appointed by the President of the United States and are responsible for supervising and directing the National Archives. The Archivist is also the nation's record keeper, tasked with preserving, protecting, and sharing the history of the country. This involves working with various records, including paper documents, photographs, maps, films, and computer records. The Archivist ensures that the records of the US government are made available to the public.

In addition to their work with NARA, the Archivist has specific duties related to the custody of important documents. For example, they must maintain custody of state ratifications of amendments to the Constitution and issue certificates of ratification. They also have duties related to the custody of Electoral College documents during US presidential elections.

The Archivist works with a team of professionals, including archives specialists, archives technicians, conservators, and records managers, who all contribute to the preservation and accessibility of historical records.

Overall, the role of the Archivist of the United States is crucial in maintaining the country's historical records and ensuring their accessibility to the public, as well as facilitating important democratic processes such as constitutional amendments and presidential elections.

Ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures

The authority to amend the US Constitution is derived from Article V of the Constitution. The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed by Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The amendment then becomes part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 out of 50 States). This process has been used for the ratification of every amendment to the Constitution thus far. This is known as the "traditional constitutional amendment process".

Article V also provides for an alternative process, which has never been utilized. If requested by two-thirds of the state legislatures, Congress shall call a constitutional convention for proposing amendments. To become part of the Constitution, any amendment proposed by that convention must be ratified by three-fourths of the states through a vote of either the state legislature or a state convention convened for that purpose.

Congress determines which method the states must follow for proposed amendments to become effective. The mode of ratification is determined by Congress, and in neither of these two processes is a vote by the electorate applicable to the ratification of a constitutional amendment.

Congress has specified this second mode of amendment only once, for the Twenty-First Amendment, which repealed the Eighteenth Amendment establishing Prohibition.

The two methods of proposing amendments

The authority to amend the US Constitution is derived from Article V of the Constitution. Article V establishes two methods for proposing amendments.

The first method requires both the House and the Senate to propose a constitutional amendment by a two-thirds majority vote. This is known as the Congressional method. Congress proposes an amendment in the form of a joint resolution. The original document is forwarded directly to NARA's Office of the Federal Register (OFR) for processing and publication. The OFR then adds legislative history notes to the joint resolution and publishes it in slip law format. The amendment then becomes part of the Constitution when it has been ratified by three-fourths (38 out of 50) of the states.

The second method, which has never been used, is an alternative process provided by Article V. If requested by two-thirds of the state legislatures, Congress shall call a constitutional convention for proposing amendments. To become part of the Constitution, any amendment proposed by that convention must be ratified by three-fourths of the states through a vote of either the state legislature or a state convention convened for that purpose.

Congress determines which method the states must follow for proposed amendments to become effective. The mode of ratification is also determined by Congress. However, it is important to note that Congressional promulgation is not a necessary feature of ratification under Article V. In the history of the amendment process, Congress has promulgated only two amendments, the 14th and the 27th, following the final state ratification.

Explore related products

The Constitution, as Amended, and Ordinances of the Convention of 1866, Together with the Proclamation of the Governor Declaring the Ratification of the Amendments to the 1866 [Leather Bound]

$29.57 $34.72

State Constitutional Politics: Governing by Amendment in the American States

$11.99 $17.99

The Debate on the Constitution : Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification, Part Two: January to August 1788 (Library of America)

$27.9 $42.5

Encyclopedia of Constitutional Amendments, Proposed Amendments, and Amending Issues, 1789–2015: 2 volumes

$208

2nd Amendment, 11.5 x 15.5 Inch Aluminum Sign, Patriotic Americana Decor for Gun Owners, Firing Ranges, Veteran, Law Enforcement, NRA Member Gifts 1216-RK3111

$34.99

Erazor Bits 2nd Amendment Black T-Shirt, Patriotic, Don't Tread On Me, Unisex-Adults, Short Sleeve, Regular Fit

$26.95

The role of the President

The President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process. The joint resolution proposing an amendment does not go to the White House for signature or approval. Instead, the original document is forwarded directly to the National Archives and Records Administration's (NARA) Office of the Federal Register (OFR) for processing and publication.

However, in recent history, the signing of the certification has become a ceremonial function attended by various dignitaries, including the President. For example, President Johnson signed the certifications for the 24th and 25th Amendments as a witness, and President Nixon witnessed the certification of the 26th Amendment.

The President's presence at these ceremonies is not a constitutional requirement but rather a symbolic act. The President's role in the ratification process is limited to these ceremonial functions and does not extend to any formal decision-making or approval powers.

It is worth noting that while the President does not have a direct role in ratifying amendments, they can influence policy changes and legislative priorities that may eventually lead to constitutional amendments. For example, President Clinton endorsed the idea of a crime victims' rights amendment, which could have led to efforts to propose and ratify such an amendment.

In summary, while the President of the United States does not have a formal constitutional role in ratifying amendments, they may participate in ceremonial functions related to the process and can indirectly influence the policy agenda that leads to constitutional changes.

The time limit for ratification

The time limit for the ratification of an amendment to the US Constitution has been a topic of debate and has evolved over time. While Article V of the Constitution grants Congress the power to propose amendments and determine the mode of ratification, it does not specify a time limit for ratification.

Historically, there were no time limits attached to proposed amendments before the 20th century. The first amendment with a time limit was the 18th Amendment (Prohibition) proposed in 1917, which included a seven-year deadline for ratification. Since then, Congress has included time limits for the ratification of all proposed amendments.

The absence of a congressionally proposed deadline can create uncertainty in the ratification process. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) advised that in such cases, the amendment remains pending before the states, and Congress lacks the authority to extend the ratification deadline or revive an amendment after the initial deadline without restarting the Article V process.

However, there have been instances where Congress has demonstrated its belief that it can alter time limits. In 1978, Congress extended the original ratification deadline for the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) by passing a bill to extend the deadline from March 22, 1979, to June 30, 1982. Additionally, the three-state strategy for ERA ratification was developed after the 1992 ratification of the "Madison Amendment" (the 27th Amendment) following a 203-year ratification period. This raised questions about the reasonable and "sufficiently contemporaneous" standards required by Supreme Court decisions.

The determination of a "reasonable time" for ratification has been a matter of discussion. Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes suggested in Coleman that Congress has the power to determine whether ratification occurs within a reasonable time. However, subsequent commentators have disagreed, stating that the Constitution does not grant Congress this role. The OLC's advice and legal precedents indicate that Congress should specify a deadline to avoid uncertainty and ensure the functionality of the ratification process.

Frequently asked questions