Subscribe to LexTalk to stay on top of today’s legal issue and trends.
Catapult Your Career |
Industry Insights & Trends |
Product Training & Tips
On May 7th, 1992, our last constitutional amendment – the 27th Amendment (barring Congress from giving itself a midterm pay raise) – was ratified. At 202 years, 7 months, and 12 days, the 27th Amendment had a record-setting ratification period.
Twenty-three years have now passed since the 27th Amendment. Since the Civil War, the longest drought between amendments is 43 years (from 1870 to 1913). The current drought will end with the 28th Amendment, but what might that amendment be?
This might not answer the question, but here’s a look at 19 failed amendments (some good, some bad, some still viable), plus 6 proposed amendments from retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.
1. "Bill of Unwritten Rights," The New Republic
2. "6 Constitutional Amendments that Just Missed the Cut," Mental Floss
3. “6 Constitutional Amendments That Could Dramatically Improve America,” Business Insider
The 28th amendment, hmm? I think the most important thing to consider regarding the 28th amendment should be determining who is qualified to determine what congressional legislation will be. It should be written something like this. "Only those members of Congress who are lawyers and or attorney's who have oaths to BAR's that are not member bars of any foreign BAR's, countries, corporations, or entities will be allowed to determine what Congressional Legislation will be. Any other members of Congress who are not lawyers and do not have an oath to any foreign Country, Corporation or entity will also be allowed to determine congressional legislation through participation and vote. The objective here is to protect the Constitution of the USA from loyalty to foreign influence. For a person who has an oath to a BAR that is a member BAR of the IBA in London technically has an oath to a foreign entity existing before taking the oath to protect and uphold the constitution of the United States of America. This issue becomes a problem in congressional legislation because most persons appointed and voted into any office in the USA could steer the country from within, and in favor of a foreign entity, that could be allowed in a court of law, provided the oath to the foreign country was existing prior to being selected for office to represent the USA.
You've got an interesting thought James. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in a way, you're envisioning an Article II type amendment (i.e., "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States ... shall be eligible to the Office of President"), but tailored towards Congress/legislative creation?