4

ART V Const US — The Amending Process

" The Congress, whenever two thirds of both
houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose
amendments to this constitution, or on the
application of two thirds of the several satates
shall call a convention for proposing amend—
ments which in either case shall be valid to
all intents and purposes as part of this
constitution when ratified by three fourths of
the legislatures of the several states, or by
conventions in three fourths thereof, as the
one or the other mode of ratification may be
proposed by the congress: Provided that no
amendment which may be made prior to 1808
shall in any manner affect the first and fourth
clauses in the ninth section of the first
article, and that no state without its consent
shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the
senate."

Notes on Coleman v Miller: 1 W&L Law Rev 215

Court deems matter of rejection and later
approval settled by historic precedent. The
political department had dealt with the first
question so evolved. In Dillon v. Gloss rati—
fication must be within some reasonable time after
proposal. Ratification is complete when the last
state required to ratify ratifies and court will
take judicial notice of such action.

Intrinsic limitations on Power of Constitutional
Amendment: 18 Mich L Rev 213. Generally held that
there are no intrinsic limitations on power of
amendment but this writer says:
1. Any limitation which court would admit
would have to be derived from the wording of the
instrument itself.
2. An amendment which would take away from the
states the powers reserved to them in the 9th and
10th Amendments would be comparable to a revolution
and reform the system of government. A state is
incompetent to legislate or grant away any of the
powers held by it and it would legally follow that
a state could not ratify such an amendment.