Amendments: Who Holds The Power To Change?

Amending a constitution is a complex process that varies across nations. For instance, in Canada, there are five different procedures for amending the constitution, with the general procedure being the standard method unless specified otherwise. This requires approval from the House of Commons, the Senate, and at least seven provincial legislatures, representing 50% of the total provincial population. On the other hand, the United States has not added a ratified amendment since 1992 due to the challenging nature of the process. A 2/3 majority is required to propose an amendment, and 3/4ths to ratify it, making bipartisan support crucial. The increasing partisanship in US politics further complicates the process, as parties are less inclined to collaborate.

Explore related products

American Constitutional Law, Volume II: The Bill of Rights and Subsequent Amendments

$105.45 $150

The Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence

$1.99 $6.95

The Democracy Amendments: Constitutional Reforms to Save the United States

$12.92 $24.21

The People’s Constitution: 200 Years, 27 Amendments, and the Promise of a More Perfect Union

$18.4 $45

Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause (Constitutional Law Series)

$3.99

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99 $9.99

Public vote or referendum

For example, in the United States, state constitutional conventions were historically held regularly to adopt amendments to existing constitutions. While less frequent in recent decades, these conventions continue to offer a path toward amending state constitutions. Legislators typically call for these conventions, and a majority or supermajority legislative vote is usually required. Once an amendment is proposed, it is submitted to the voters for approval, with varying requirements for ratification across states.

In the specific case of Rhode Island, voters approved an automatically generated referendum that led to the last full-scale state constitutional convention in 1986. This convention resulted in 14 amendments being submitted to voters, with 8 of them approved. Additionally, four states (Hawaii, Minnesota, Tennessee, and Wyoming) require amendments to their state constitutions to be approved by a majority of voters in the entire election. Illinois has a similar approach, allowing amendments to be approved by three-fifths of voters on the amendment or by a majority of voters in the election.

Another example is Australia, where a bill to amend the Constitution must first be passed by both houses of Parliament before being submitted to the people. A simple majority of those voting is required for ratification. Similarly, Switzerland has a similar procedure to Australia, requiring legislative approval before submitting amendments to a public vote.

In summary, a public vote or referendum is an essential mechanism for proposing and ratifying constitutional amendments in many jurisdictions. It empowers citizens to have a direct say in shaping the fundamental laws that govern them and provides a pathway for legislative change outside the traditional lawmaking process.

Provincial approval

In Canada, there are five different procedures for amending different aspects of constitutional law. The general procedure for amending the Constitution requires approval from the House of Commons, the Senate, and at least seven provincial legislatures, representing at least 50% of the total provincial population, also known as the 7/50 rule. This means that provinces with larger populations play a more significant role in the amendment process, as their approval is typically necessary for any constitutional changes.

The specific changes that can be made through the general procedure are outlined in Section 42 of the Constitution Act, 1982. These include modifications to the powers and selection process of Senators. Additionally, the general procedure is also required for establishing new provinces.

Before 1982, Canada required the British Parliament's intervention to amend its Constitution. However, with the desire to "patriate" the Constitution, Canada needed to create an acceptable amending formula that would be agreed upon by Britain, the federal government, and the provincial governments. This process involved ensuring that all provinces had a say in any potential changes to the Constitution.

While there is no direct approval required from the Canadian people for constitutional amendments, some provinces, such as Alberta and BC, have passed laws mandating a referendum before approving any constitutional changes. Additionally, the federal government has a law in place, "An Act respecting Constitutional Amendments," which requires support from several specific provinces before proposing an amendment. These additional steps further emphasize the importance of provincial approval in the process of amending Canada's Constitution.

Bipartisan support

Amending a constitution is a challenging process, often requiring bipartisan support and a range of approvals. In the US, for example, the constitution has not been amended since 1992, largely due to the challenge of achieving bipartisan support. The US functions as a two-party system, and no party has achieved a 2/3 majority at the federal level, requiring partial bipartisan support for any amendment. The increasing polarisation of US politics makes this challenging, as parties are less likely to work together.

For an amendment to pass, it must be a very popular idea, generally beyond what would be required for a regular law to pass. This is because a constitutional amendment requires 3/4 of the states to ratify it, a high bar to clear. This means that even if an idea is popular, it may not be possible for politicians to support it publicly, as their constituents may not approve.

In Canada, there are five different procedures for changing aspects of constitutional law. The general procedure requires approval from the House of Commons, the Senate, and a minimum number of provincial legislatures. This includes at least seven provinces, representing at least 50% of the total population, often referred to as the 7/50 rule. This ensures that provinces with larger populations must typically approve any changes.

Some Canadian provinces, such as Alberta and BC, have passed laws requiring a referendum before any constitutional changes can be approved, adding an extra step to the process. Additionally, the federal government has a law called "An Act respecting Constitutional Amendments," which requires support from several specific provinces before proposing any amendments. These measures further emphasise the need for broad support and consensus when making constitutional changes.

Explore related products

The First Amendment: [Connected Ebook] (Aspen Casebook) (Aspen Casebook Series)

$326 $326

American Constitutional Law: Introductory Essays and Selected Cases

$140

The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic

$15.99 $26.99

American Constitutional Law: Introductory Essays and Selected Cases

$143.59 $180

The Constitutional Amending Process in American Political Thought

$95

A Companion to the United States Constitution and Its Amendments

$34.65 $45

Support from 3/4 of states

Amending a constitution is a complex process that varies across nations. In the context of the United States, amending the constitution requires significant support and consensus. While the process of proposing an amendment may differ, the focus of this discussion is on attaining support from 3/4 of states, a critical aspect of the amendment process.

The United States Constitution has not been amended since 1992, underscoring the difficulty and rarity of implementing constitutional changes. To propose an amendment, there is a substantial barrier of attaining a 2/3 majority, which is intentionally challenging due to the country's two-party system dynamics. However, the focus of this discussion is on the subsequent step of attaining support from 3/4 of the states, which is an even higher threshold and an even more formidable obstacle.

The requirement of support from 3/4 of the states, also known as ratification, ensures that any amendment reflects a strong national consensus. This high bar is set to prevent controversial or partisan changes from being implemented. It also serves as a safeguard against hasty or impulsive alterations to the foundational document of the nation. This requirement encourages broad agreement and ensures that amendments are generally accepted across the country, rather than being limited to certain regions or ideologies.

To achieve support from 3/4 of the states, there must be a significant degree of cooperation and compromise between political parties. In a highly partisan political climate, this can be exceedingly difficult. Individual congresspeople may face repercussions from their constituents if they are perceived as cooperating with the opposing party. Therefore, even if many congresspeople privately agree with a proposed amendment, they may be reluctant to voice their support openly, hindering the amendment process.

The process of attaining support from 3/4 of the states can be further complicated by the varying populations of different states. More populous states inherently carry more weight in the amendment process, as their approval is necessary for an amendment to succeed. This dynamic can influence the strategies and considerations involved in pursuing constitutional amendments, as proponents must navigate the complex landscape of state-level politics and public opinion.

In summary, attaining support from 3/4 of the states is a critical and challenging aspect of the amendment process. It requires broad national agreement, encourages bipartisan cooperation, and safeguards the constitution from impulsive or controversial changes. The high threshold set for ratification ensures that any amendments reflect the values and consensus of the vast majority of the country. While this process is intentionally difficult, it plays a pivotal role in shaping the nation's governing document and protecting its fundamental principles.

General procedure

The general procedure is the standard way to amend a constitution and is required unless another formula is specified. The general formula is also required for specific changes, such as altering the powers and selection process of senators. This formula would also be used to establish new provinces or states.

To amend a constitution using the general procedure, the change must be approved by the House of Commons, the Senate, and a minimum number of provincial or state legislatures. In Canada, there must be at least seven provinces that approve the change, representing at least 50% of the total provincial population. This is often referred as the 7/50 rule, ensuring that provinces with larger populations have a greater say in constitutional amendments.

In the United States, amending the constitution is intentionally challenging. A two-thirds majority is required just to propose an amendment, and even then, it must be ratified by three-quarters of the states. This high threshold is due to the country's two-party system, where bipartisan support is needed for any amendment to pass. The more partisan the country becomes, the harder it is to achieve the necessary consensus.

While some governments prefer to include a public vote or referendum before amending the constitution, this is not a requirement in most cases. However, certain regions, such as Alberta and BC in Canada, have passed laws mandating a referendum before constitutional changes can be approved. Additionally, the Canadian federal government has a law requiring support from several specific provinces before proposing an amendment, further complicating the process.

Frequently asked questions