lets say the senate and the house propose an amendment to the constitution, and all the states ratify it, making it effective. the supreme court has no say in this process correct?
2007-07-21 07:39:56 · 7 answers · asked by Kevy 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Congress proposes amendments.
both houses of Congress approve by two-thirds votes a resolution calling for the amendment. The resolution does not require the president's signature. To become effective, the proposed amendment must then be "ratified" or approved by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states. Congress typically places a time limit of seven years for ratification by the states.
The states propose amendments.
The legislatures of two-thirds of the states vote to call for a convention at which constitutional amendments can be proposed. Amendments proposed by the convention would again require ratification by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.
2007-07-21 09:18:27 · update #1
Mostly correct.
The Supreme Court can interpret the new amendment if it conflicts with some other part of the Constitution, if the Amendment doesn't clarify how the conflict should be resolved.
If it's a direct replacement, then it's simple -- the newer provision overrides the older clause. But if it's possible for both to co-exist, then it's up to the Court to interpret how they co-exist.
2007-07-21 07:43:33 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
To AMEND something is to change it.
Thus, Amendments ARE the Constitution, that is, they are changes to the Constitution.
That's why the process is so hard. You need a super-majority to change the Constitution.
You're right that the court has no part in the Amenedment process, as far as getting a change ratified: it's the legislative bodies, federal and state, that make it so.
2007-07-21 19:25:19 · answer #2 · answered by tehabwa 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Correct, the amendment becomes a part of the Constitution.
2007-07-21 14:43:13 · answer #3 · answered by regerugged 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. But, you need to look into how an amendment is made. You don't seem to understand the process.
2007-07-21 15:14:43 · answer #4 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, they can't.
The ammendment repealing prohibition was unconstitutional until it was ratified, then it became part of the constitution.
2007-07-21 14:43:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
True, but the Supreme Court can still ignore it later if they are activist liberals.
2007-07-21 14:44:14 · answer #6 · answered by Tommy B 6 · 1⤊ 5⤋
men in uniform are hot
2007-07-22 20:00:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋