Exploring Reasons For No Second Constitution

Since 1787, there has not been a second constitutional convention in the United States. While there have been sporadic calls for a second convention to address perceived shortcomings in the Federal system, groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Organization for Women, and the Gun Owners Clubs of America are opposed to the idea. The current process of amending the Constitution involves two steps: proposals must be adopted by either a two-thirds majority in Congress or a national convention, and then ratified by three-fourths of the states. The longest pending amendment that was successfully ratified was the 22nd Amendment, which took 3 years, 343 days. The United States Constitution, which was signed in 1787, is one of the longest-lived and most emulated constitutions in the world.

Explore related products

We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution

$31.99 $39.99

The Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence

$1.99 $6.95

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

$9.99 $9.99

The Words That Made Us: America's Constitutional Conversation, 1760-1840

$22.76 $40

The Constitutional Convention: A Narrative History from the Notes of James Madison (Modern Library Classics)

$13.65 $22

The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates (Signet Classics)

$8.32 $8.95

Amendments to the Constitution must be ratified by three-quarters of state legislatures

The United States Constitution has been amended 27 times since its ratification in 1788, with the first 10 amendments forming the Bill of Rights. The process of amending the Constitution, rather than drafting a new one, allows for the preservation of the foundational principles established by the Founding Fathers while also enabling necessary changes to be made to reflect the evolving nature of American society.

The Bill of Rights presented an initial challenge to the newly ratified Constitution. James Madison, often referred to as the "Father of the Constitution," initially proposed 20 amendments with a separate preamble to the Bill of Rights. After revisions by the House of Representatives and the Senate, the "final" Bill of Rights emerged with 12 amendments. However, these amendments underwent further changes, and only 10 were ratified by enough states to be included in the Constitution.

The process of amending the Constitution is outlined in Article V of the original document. Amendments must be ratified by three-quarters of state legislatures, reflecting the importance of state-level approval for any changes to the foundational charter of the nation. This ensures that any alterations to the Constitution are widely accepted and supported by the states, each with its own unique interests and perspectives.

The debate surrounding the ratification of the Constitution and the subsequent amendments highlights the tension between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Federalists, including Madison, initially argued against the need for a bill of rights, asserting that the federal government could not pose a significant threat to liberty. On the other hand, Anti-Federalists advocated for a bill of rights to limit federal power and prevent the disarming of state militias.

The inclusion of the Bill of Rights as amendments to the Constitution was a compromise that ensured the support of enough Anti-Federalists for the ratification of the Constitution. This compromise demonstrates the delicate balance of interests and ideologies that shaped the foundation of American governance. By amending the Constitution rather than drafting a new one, the Founding Fathers laid a flexible framework that could adapt to the nation's changing needs while retaining its core principles.

Congress is reluctant to call a convention

The United States Constitution provides two methods for amending the nation's frame of government. The first method authorizes Congress, whenever two-thirds of both houses deem it necessary, to propose constitutional amendments. The second method requires Congress, on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states (currently 34), to call a convention of states for proposing amendments.

Despite calls for a second constitutional convention, Congress is reluctant to call for one. This reluctance can be attributed to various factors, including:

• Concerns over spending and borrowing powers: Congress may be hesitant to impose limitations on its spending, borrowing, and taxing powers. According to anti-tax activist David Biddulph, Congress has been reluctant to restrict these powers, which could be a significant issue for a second constitutional convention.
• Fear of wholesale revision: Some groups worry that a convention summoned to address a single issue might propose a complete revision of the Constitution, potentially limiting provisions they value. These groups include the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Organization for Women, and the Gun Owners Clubs of America. They oppose the idea of a second convention due to the risk of extreme proposals.
• Vague language in the current Constitution: Constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe notes that the language in the Constitution regarding how to implement a second convention is "dangerously vague." This vagueness could lead to uncertainty and potential issues in the process of convening a second convention.
• Requirement of identical wording in state petitions: Some politicians and scholars insist that all 34 state petitions to Congress must have identical wording; otherwise, the petitions would be considered invalid. This requirement adds complexity and could hinder the process of calling a second convention.
• Perceived shortcomings in the federal system: Since the initial 1787–88 debate over ratification, there have been sporadic calls for a second convention to address perceived shortcomings in the federal system established by the Constitution. However, Congress may be reluctant to acknowledge or address these shortcomings, especially if they involve limiting its own powers.
• Alternative paths for reform: Some, like Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig, argue that urging state legislatures to call for a Constitutional Convention is the best path to substantive reform. This alternative path bypasses Congress, allowing states to propose amendments directly, which may be more appealing to those who view Congress as the problem.

These factors contribute to Congress's reluctance to call for a second constitutional convention, despite proposals from academics and activists across the political spectrum.

The Constitution is one of the longest-lived and most emulated

The United States Constitution is one of the longest-lived and most emulated constitutions in the world. It has been in effect since 1787, and while there have been 27 amendments, there has not been an overall constitutional convention since its inception. The Constitution has provided a framework for the US government and its people for over 200 years, and it continues to be a source of inspiration and guidance for many.

The Constitution's longevity can be attributed to its flexibility and adaptability. The framers of the Constitution created a system that allowed for amendments, recognising that the document would need to evolve with changing times. The amendment process, outlined in Article V of the Constitution, provides two methods for proposing amendments: through Congress or a national convention. This has allowed for necessary changes to be made while maintaining the stability and continuity of the government.

The Constitution has also served as a model for other nations. Its influence can be seen in the Australian Constitution, which integrated federal ideas from the US and other constitutions. Abraham Lincoln, Benito Juárez of Mexico, José Rizal of the Philippines, and Sun Yat-sen of China are also said to have been influenced by the American experience of fundamental law with amendments and judicial review.

However, there have been calls for a second constitutional convention to address perceived shortcomings in the federal system. Some groups advocate for specific reforms, such as the Balanced Budget Amendment, while others propose more wholesale revisions. The idea of a second convention is controversial, with some arguing that it could lead to extreme proposals or limit certain provisions that are held dear.

Despite these calls for change, the US Constitution remains a resilient and enduring document. Its longevity and influence demonstrate its effectiveness in providing a stable framework for governance, even as the nation has evolved and faced new challenges. The Constitution's impact extends beyond the US, as it has inspired and informed constitutional traditions worldwide.

Explore related products

The U.S. Constitution and Other Writings (Leather-bound Classics)

$13.21 $24.99

Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence: Senator Rand Paul, Delegates of The Constitutional Convention

$2.99 $2.99

The People's Guide to the United States Constitution

$13.39 $15.95

Born Equal: Remaking America’s Constitution, 1840–1920

$36.96 $40

American Constitutional History: A Brief Introduction

$36.95 $36.95

Against Constitutional Originalism: A Historical Critique (Yale Law Library Series in Legal History and Reference)

$17.01 $22

The language of the Constitution is vague on implementing a second

The United States Constitution, one of the longest-lived and most emulated constitutions in the world, has been in place since 1787. However, there have been sporadic calls for a second convention to address perceived shortcomings in the Federal system. Despite these calls, the language of the Constitution regarding the implementation of a second convention is vague, and there are concerns about the potential for a wholesale revision of the entire Constitution.

Article V of the Constitution outlines two methods for amending the nation's frame of government. The first method authorises Congress to propose constitutional amendments when two-thirds of both houses deem it necessary. The second method requires Congress to call a convention of states for proposing amendments upon the application of two-thirds of the state legislatures (currently 34). While these provisions provide a mechanism for change, they do not explicitly address the process of implementing a complete second constitution.

Constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe highlights the vagueness of the current Constitution's language on how to implement a second one. This vagueness raises concerns about the potential for far-reaching changes. Different groups, including civil liberties organisations and political advocacy groups, worry that a convention could lead to a comprehensive revision of the Constitution, threatening provisions they hold dear.

The amendment process, as outlined in the Constitution, allows for incremental changes and adaptations to meet changing conditions. However, the lack of clear guidance on convening a second constitutional convention contributes to the perception of vagueness in addressing more significant revisions or a complete overhaul. This ambiguity has resulted in reluctance and caution among politicians and scholars when considering a second convention.

While the Constitution provides mechanisms for amendments, the language regarding a comprehensive second convention remains vague and open to interpretation. This vagueness has likely contributed to the enduring nature of the Constitution, with amendments serving as the primary means of implementing change.

The Constitution has faced criticism and calls for reform

The United States Constitution has faced various criticisms and calls for reform since its inception in 1787. One of the main criticisms of the Constitution is that it is a living document that is open to interpretation, which can lead to inconsistencies in how it is applied. The Constitution has also been criticised for its ambiguous language, which can make it difficult to determine the original intent of the framers.

Another criticism is that the Constitution does not explicitly address certain issues, such as the balance of power between the federal government and the states, the role of the judiciary, and the protection of individual rights. Some people also argue that the Constitution is outdated and does not reflect the current values and beliefs of American society. For example, the Three-Fifths Compromise, which was included in the original Constitution, allowed for the counting of enslaved Africans as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of congressional representation. This compromise was a temporary solution to a contentious issue that threatened to derail the Union, and it was eventually abolished with the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865.

There have been sporadic calls for a second constitutional convention to address these perceived shortcomings and to make substantive reforms to the federal government. Proponents of a second convention argue that it would provide an opportunity to update and clarify the language of the Constitution, as well as to address specific issues such as the role of money in politics and the influence of special interests.

However, there is also significant opposition to the idea of a second constitutional convention. Some groups worry that a second convention could lead to a wholesale revision of the Constitution, potentially threatening provisions that are important to certain constituencies. Additionally, the high bar for ratifying amendments (requiring the approval of three-quarters of state legislatures or state ratifying conventions) may make the process of reform through a second convention difficult and unlikely.

Despite these criticisms and calls for reform, the United States Constitution remains one of the longest-lived and most emulated constitutions in the world. It has been a source of inspiration for many other nations and has helped to shape the course of history, both within the United States and beyond.

Frequently asked questions