[EL] Constitutional conventions

[J.H. Snider]

Two points:

Bill, while it is true that "state constitutions of recent vintage have been overly legislative and needlessly technical," it is not true that the cause of that bloat was state constitutional conventions, as your comment implies. To the contrary, the state constitutional conventions held during the last half of the 20th Century for the most part resulted in a dramatic streamlining of state constitutions. To my knowledge, no state legislature can boast of a similar accomplishment.

David, Sandy Levinson agrees with your Article V ambiguity analysis but comes to a very different conclusion.  I suggest that you wrestle with his argument.  Also, during 1933 and 1934, 39 states held state constitutional conventions on whether to appeal the 21st Amendment. I suggest that in your analysis you distinguish between proposing and ratifying constitutional conventions. There is much less ambiguity about ratifying conventions, since we've had 52 of them since 1787, as opposed to only one proposing convention.

Sincerely,

J.H. Snider, Editor
The State Constitutional Convention Clearinghouse<http://concon.info/>


From: Law-election [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Maurer
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2018 5:58 PM
To: Schultz, David A. <dschultz at hamline.edu>; law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Constitutional conventions

Excellent piece, Professor. I would add that state constitutions of recent vintage have been overly legislative and needlessly technical. A national convention would likely produce a similarly bloated and inflexible document, as the delegates attempt to freeze in place specific policy preferences and approaches. Instead of a broad guideline for the conduct of government, we'd run the risk of getting a phonebook-sized mess that would quickly become outdated and unworkable.

Bill Maurer

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Schultz, David A.<mailto:dschultz at hamline.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2018 5:41 AM
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
Subject: [EL] Constitutional conventions

An oped I did on constitutional conventions.

https://www.twincities.com/2018/03/18/david-schultz-why-a-constitutional-convention-is-a-bad-idea/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180319/985e411d/attachment.html>