# Is the Corwin Amendment still on the table? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 10, 2008, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709 "2008-04-10T01:21:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![SSG\_Schwartz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@SSG\_Schwartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SSG_Schwartz)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/1 "2008-04-10T01:21:09Z")
I just read about the [Corwin Amendment](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment). Could this actually pass? If so, who would be enslaved? Would there be one group? I don’t think any one racial group would be a victim if it passed today, so where would the slaves come from? Finally, if it passed, and some persons were enslaved would you buy a slave? SSG Schwartz ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/2 "2008-04-10T01:40:13Z")
Shirley, you jest. ---
**Author:** ![SSG\_Schwartz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@SSG\_Schwartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SSG_Schwartz)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/3 "2008-04-10T02:25:23Z")
1. I am not joking. 2. Don’t call me Shirley. SSG Schwartz ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/4 "2008-04-10T03:33:09Z")
Nobody would be enslaved, were the Corwin Amendment to achieve ratification by a 34th state. the 13th Amendment has already rendered it moot (at least, wrt slavery). ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/5 "2008-04-10T03:49:09Z")
I’m not entirely sure what the legal effects would be if you passed an amendment saying a _prior_ amendment couldn’t be passed. It’s obvious what happens if you pass an amendment which specifically voids a prior amendment–we had this happen before (the 21st voided the 18th.) But the Corwin Amendment’s text, since it was written prior to the passage of the 13th Amendment, wouldn’t directly void the 13th. Furthermore, I think a more interesting question is what happens if we pass an amendment saying “no amendment can be passed which does X.” My opinion is that the answer is actually somewhat simple. The SCOTUS can’t strike down a constitutional amendment, they can only rule about what the constitution _says right now_ they can’t prohibit changes to the constitution. So what this means is, the Corwin Amendment _could_ have been passed prior to the 13th Amendment. However, it would serve as no protection whatsoever from a future amendment that went against its intentions, since there is no body which can “stop” an amendment from passing if enough states agree on it, then an amendment prohibiting other amendments by its nature can’t really work. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/6 "2008-04-10T03:52:44Z")
delete duplicate ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/7 "2008-04-10T03:55:18Z")
The text of the amendment: “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.” As far as slavery is concerned, it’s irrelevant – it would prohibit any _new_ anti-slavery amendments, but we already _have_ a comprehensive anti-slavery amendment. The question of what else might be included within a state’s “domestic institutions” opens an interesting can of worms. I suppose it could be construed to prohibit any amendment that would (for example) interfere with a state’s right to define marriage as it sees fit… :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/8 "2008-04-10T04:01:39Z")
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde] So what this means is, the Corwin Amendment _could_ have been passed prior to the 13th Amendment. However, it would serve as no protection whatsoever from a future amendment that went against its intentions, since there is no body which can “stop” an amendment from passing if enough states agree on it, then an amendment prohibiting other amendments by its nature can’t really work. [/QUOTE] Does that also apply to the two “entrenchment clauses” (the 20-year protection of the slave trade and the protection of equal state representation in the Senate) in the original Constitution? ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/9 "2008-04-10T15:50:33Z")
[QUOTE=SSG Schwartz] I just read about the [Corwin Amendment](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment). Could this actually pass? [/quote] I hope that you mean “could” in the legal/theoretical sense, not “could” in a practical sense. Legally and theoretically, yes, this amendment could be ratified by the necessary number (38, less the two that ratified in 1861) of states and become part of the Constitution. There is no inherent time limit on constitutional amendments. The Twenty-Seventh Amendment was proposed in 1791 and ratified in 1992, and while there has been no definitive litigation, it’s assumed to be part of the United States Constitution. In practical terms, I’m not hearing a lot of pro-slavery agitation these days. Are you? > [@SSG Schwartz](#): > > If so, who would be enslaved? Nobody. Nobody would be enslaved by barring future anti-slavery amendments when we already have an anti-slavery amendment. Also, I may hold an overly roseate view of my fellow Americans, but I believe that even if the federal Constitution didn’t ban slavery, no state government today would seek to re-establish it. > [@SSG Schwartz](#): > > Finally, if it passed, and some persons were enslaved would you buy a slave? No, I’m really not into bondage of any kind. Good luck finding anybody brave enough to answer this “yes”! ---
**Author:** ![Driver8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5a626/32.png) [@Driver8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Driver8)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/10 "2008-04-10T20:15:10Z")
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde] Furthermore, I think a more interesting question is what happens if we pass an amendment saying “no amendment can be passed which does X.” [/QUOTE] I was wondering about this myself. I’m not sure how an amendment reading “no amendment can be passed which does X” could ever be useful. Surely then in the future if the appropriate majority wanted to create an amendment that did “X” they would simply first create an amendment that canceled the “no amendment can be passed which does X” amendment? Am I misunderstanding something? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/11 "2008-04-10T20:40:04Z")
[QUOTE=SSG Schwartz] **Is the Corwin Amendment still on the table?** [/QUOTE] I hope so! [Eric sux!](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_princes_in_amber) ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/12 "2008-04-10T20:48:35Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] I hope so! [Eric sux!](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_princes_in_amber) [/QUOTE] Hah; that was what “Corwin” immediately brought to my mind as well. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/13 "2008-04-10T21:22:49Z")
[QUOTE=Driver8] I was wondering about this myself. I’m not sure how an amendment reading “no amendment can be passed which does X” could ever be useful. Surely then in the future if the appropriate majority wanted to create an amendment that did “X” they would simply first create an amendment that canceled the “no amendment can be passed which does X” amendment? Am I misunderstanding something? [/QUOTE] That’s a good point. Maybe when you introduce the amendment to “Repeal the ‘No amendment can be passed with does x’ amendment” then a motion could be made that it is out of order or unconstitutional, because such an amendment could have no other purpose that doing x, which is not legitimate. (Got all that? 😉 ) Because we’ve got only one of those now, which is that no state shall be deprived of equal representation in the Senate. I would think that if you introduced an amendment to remove the prohibition on amending the constution to deprive a state of its equal representation in the Senate, that such an amendment could serve no other purpose than to open the doorway to do what the constitution says can’t be done. Whew. Well, I understood what I was trying to say 5 minutes ago, but now I’m lost… :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/14 "2008-04-10T21:38:38Z")
[QUOTE=Der Trihs] Hah; that was what “Corwin” immediately brought to my mind as well. [/QUOTE] Mine too. Which is kind of scary. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2008, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/15 "2008-04-10T22:04:21Z")
[QUOTE=SSG Schwartz] I just read about the [Corwin Amendment](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment). Could this actually pass? If so, who would be enslaved? Would there be one group? I don’t think any one racial group would be a victim if it passed today, so where would the slaves come from? Finally, if it passed, and some persons were enslaved would you buy a slave? SSG Schwartz [/QUOTE] You realize it’s 150 years old, right? ---
**Author:** ![SSG\_Schwartz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@SSG\_Schwartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SSG_Schwartz)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2008, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/16 "2008-04-11T02:30:13Z")
[QUOTE=Cisco] You realize it’s 150 years old, right? [/QUOTE] You realize that there is no time limit on proposed Amendments, right? SSG Schwartz ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2008, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/17 "2008-04-11T05:35:43Z")
[QUOTE=SSG Schwartz] You realize that there is no time limit on proposed Amendments, right? SSG Schwartz [/QUOTE] But what’s your point? Is this a thought-exercise or do you think this has a serious chance of passing soon? It’s terribly anachronistic. ---
**Author:** ![SSG\_Schwartz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@SSG\_Schwartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SSG_Schwartz)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2008, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/18 "2008-04-12T03:00:29Z")
Og, I hope it doesn’t pass. I have sold out on everything else in my life for one thing or another. Hell, I may sell myself if slavery was allowed again. The OP was more of a thought exercise. SSG Schwartz ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2008, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/19 "2008-04-12T03:14:45Z")
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde] I’m not entirely sure what the legal effects would be if you passed an amendment saying a _prior_ amendment couldn’t be passed. It’s obvious what happens if you pass an amendment which specifically voids a prior amendment–we had this happen before (the 21st voided the 18th.) But the Corwin Amendment’s text, since it was written prior to the passage of the 13th Amendment, wouldn’t directly void the 13th. Furthermore, I think a more interesting question is what happens if we pass an amendment saying “no amendment can be passed which does X.” My opinion is that the answer is actually somewhat simple. The SCOTUS can’t strike down a constitutional amendment, they can only rule about what the constitution _says right now_ they can’t prohibit changes to the constitution. So what this means is, the Corwin Amendment _could_ have been passed prior to the 13th Amendment. However, it would serve as no protection whatsoever from a future amendment that went against its intentions, since there is no body which can “stop” an amendment from passing if enough states agree on it, then an amendment prohibiting other amendments by its nature can’t really work. [/QUOTE] I don’t know about that. Presumably, if the nation were supid enough, it could pass an amendment stripping the constitution of all mechanisms to create and pass future amendments. ---
**Author:** ![fisha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@fisha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fisha)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2008, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709/20 "2008-04-12T03:57:04Z")
[QUOTE=SSG Schwartz] Og, I hope it doesn’t pass. I have sold out on everything else in my life for one thing or another. Hell, I may sell myself if slavery was allowed again. The OP was more of a thought exercise. SSG Schwartz [/QUOTE] Let me go check the couch for loose change. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-corwin-amendment-still-on-the-table/444709.md?page=2)