New Article: James Madison, Federal Overreaching, and Amendments Conventions

By on July 23, 2012 in Uncategorized
  • Share on Tumblr

The writings of James Madison still offer useful guidance for states seeking to restrain federal overreaching.

Akron Law Review has just published my short article discussing the evolution of Madison’s thought on the subject—from Federalist No. 46, through the Virginia Resolution of 1798 and subsequent writings, to his final recommendation that states unhappy with federal actions apply for a convention for proposing amendments under the Constitution’s Article V.

Madison’s correspondence during 1788 and 1789 sometimes is cited as proving he was opposed to such conventions. My article examines the correspondence, and shows how it is being misunderstood.

The article is called James Madison and the Constitution’s “Convention for Proposing Amendments.” You can read it by clicking here.

About Rob Natelson

In private life, Rob Natelson is a long-time conservative/free market activist, but professionally he is a constitutional scholar whose meticulous studies of the Constitution's original meaning have been published or cited by many top law journals. (See: www.constitution.i2i.org/about/.) Most recently, he co-authored The Origins of the Necessary and Proper Clause (Cambridge University Press) and The Original Constitution (Tenth Amendment Center). After a quarter of a century as Professor of Law at the University of Montana, he recently retired to work full time at Colorado's Independence Institute.
View all posts by Rob Natelson →

Enjoyed This Post?

We cannot succeed without your help, as we will never accept government grants or handouts. Please help us by investing in the Constitution and freedom today!

Enjoyed This Post?
1 comments
  Livefyre
Newest | Oldest
dmellon
dmellon

Excellent article but I am not sure how popular it will be with those convinced every state has the authority to nullify federal laws they consider unconstitutional.  However if the amendment process is the only solution other than a call to arms to counter federal usurpation of our liberty then we are indeed in serious trouble.  Even with an act so obviously unconstitutional as the total takeover of the nations healthcare, one of the original state police powers never delegated to the Federal Government, no more than a simple majority of states even challenged a few provisions of the law.  No person could believe 3/4 of the states would ratify an amendment overturning Obamacare.  Perhaps the amendment process was useful when there were 13 states but today it will be of little consequence in curbing federal power.  We need something better.