Permitting States to Rescind Ratifications of Pending Amendments to the U.S. Constitution
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10934514 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John R Vile |
| Year | 1990 |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 109-122 |
| Publication date | 1990-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Publius The Journal of Federalism (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0048-5950 • E-ISSN: 1747-7107 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubjof.a037867 |
| OpenAlex | W2327984330 |
| Language | EN |
Among the troublesome questions still surrounding the U.S. constitutional amending process is whether states should be allowed to rescind ratifications of pending amendments. The Constitution is silent about this issue. Arguments from fairness and contemporary consensus, and concerns about hasty changes, support the acceptance of rescissions. Arguments for finality, the desirability of encouraging state legislatures to make serious decisions, and the difficulty of the current process suggest that rescissions should not be permitted, but these concerns are not as weighty as they might appear at first. A law accepting or rejecting all rescissions is preferable to a system where Congress makes partisan judgments in individual cases
Constitution · Law and economics · Legislature · Political science · Process (computing · Sociology · State (computer science · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Computer Science · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Legal and Constitutional Studies
| Highly cited | No |
|---|