# New Constitutional Convention?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-constitutional-convention/43614>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [December 1, 2000, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-constitutional-convention/43614 "2000-12-01T18:41:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jmullaney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jmullaney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jmullaney)\
**Post date:** [December 1, 2000, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-constitutional-convention/43614/1 "2000-12-01T18:41:27Z")

</div>

This was inspired by the thead on the old convetion which brought the U.S. from the Articles to the current constitution.

I’ve heard various fringe groups talk about this and all sorts of rules for calling one.

Where does all that come from?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/earl_snake-hips_tucker/32/3269_2.png) [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker)\
**Post date:** [December 1, 2000, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-constitutional-convention/43614/2 "2000-12-01T18:50:00Z")

</div>

A previous thread on this subject:

[http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=45998](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=45998)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jmullaney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jmullaney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jmullaney)\
**Post date:** [December 1, 2000, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-constitutional-convention/43614/3 "2000-12-01T19:13:44Z")

</div>

Well, OK. Same title, different question.

Here’s the the Constitution says:

> [@](#):
>
> Article V
> 
> The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a  
> convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths 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 the year one thousand eight  
> hundred and eight 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.

which I suppose is applicable. Do people take this to mean not just ammendment but the entire thing can be re-written?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\
**Post date:** [December 1, 2000, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-constitutional-convention/43614/4 "2000-12-01T19:31:40Z")

</div>

If two-thirds of the states demanded a Constitutional Convention, the result would indeed be a body similar to that which was called to amend the Articles of Confederation in 1787. The Convention would be able to propose multiple amendments to the Constitution; this is plainly set forth in the language of Art. V.

More interesting is the question of whether the Convention could propose a whole new Constitution, in the same way the Constitutional Convention of 1787 discarded the Articles of Confederation and started anew. It is doubtful that we shall ever need to know. 🙂