Patriots across Michigan and within the Michigan Legislature have come to realize the pitfalls of calling a Constitutional Convention or “ConCon” under Article V of the U.S. Constitution. Why? Just read some of the analyses of the ultimate result of calling a convention and having the current U.S. Congress drive the selection of delegates and determine the scope:
Brilliant men have warned that delegates to a convention can’t be controlled
James Madison, Father of our Constitution, said in his Nov. 2, 1788 letter to Turberville that he “trembled” at the prospect of a second convention; and that if there were an Art. V Convention:
“the most violent partizans”, and “individuals of insidious views” would strive to be delegates and would have “a dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric” of our Country.
In Federalist No. 49, Madison warns against a convention to correct breaches of the Constitution. He said the legislators who caused the problem would get themselves seats at the convention and would be in a position to control the outcome of a convention.
In Federalist No. 85 (last para), Alexander Hamilton said he “dreads” the consequences of another convention because the enemies of the Constitution want to get rid of it.
Our first US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay wrote that another convention would run an “extravagant risque.“
US Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg reminds us in his Sep. 14, 1986 editorial in The Miami Herald that at the convention of 1787, the delegates ignored their instructions from the Continental Congress and instead of proposing amendments to the Articles of Confederation, wrote a new Constitution; and that
“…any attempt at limiting the agenda would almost certainly be unenforceable.”
US Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger said in his June 1988 letter to Phyllis Schlafly:
“…there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention…” “After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the Convention if we don’t like its agenda…” “…A new Convention could plunge our Nation into constitutional confusion and confrontation at every turn…”
US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said on April 17, 2014 at the 1:06 mark of this video.
“I certainly would not want a constitutional convention. I mean, whoa! Who knows what would come out of that?”
HERE are additional letters and articles by eminent Jurists and scholars to the same effect.
Yet convention supporters ridicule these warnings as “fear mongering.” And they quote law professor Scalia in 1979, before his decades of experience as a Supreme Court Justice, to “prove” otherwise.
Any person who does NOT seriously consider these warnings from these 6 men is a fool. One must ask, “Is it possible that James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Justice Jay, Justice Goldberg, Justice Burger and Justice Scalia understood something about the plenipotentiary powers of delegates to an Article V convention which I haven’t yet grasped?
Even more thought-provoking is an essay from Constitutional scholar Publis Hulda, in her stinging and insightful essay, “Why State Legislators should REJECT All Applications asking Congress to call an Article V Convention”: (click below)