Wiki_QA__##

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
Title: Can We Trust The Constitution

Original CoS Document (slug): [[https://conventionofstates.com/files/can-we-trust-the-constitution|can-we-trust-the-constitution]]

Login Required to view? No

Attached File: Article3-CanWeTrust_COSA102022.pdf

Created: 2021-07-21 13:56:44

Updated: 2024-06-24 17:26:21

Published: 2021-07-21 00:00:00

Converted: 2025-04-14T20:00:13.549860215


----


{{:cb_mirror_public:media:files_12852_pdfto001.png?nolink&918x1188 |background image}}
**Can We Trust the Constitution?**

**Answering The “Runaway Convention” Myth\\
**Michael P. Farris, JD, LLM, Convention of States Action — Senior Fellow for Constitutional Studies

Updated November 2022\\
Some people contend that our \\
Constitution was illegally adopted as the \\
result of a “runaway convention.” They \\
make two claims:

1. The convention delegates were instructed to \\
merely amend the Articles of Confederation, but \\
they wrote a whole new document.\\
 \\
2. The ratification process was improperly \\
changed from 13 state legislatures to 9 state \\
ratification conventions.

**The Delegates Obeyed Their \\
Instructions from the States**

The claim that the delegates disobeyed \\
their instructions is based on the idea \\
that Congress called the Constitutional \\
Convention. Proponents of this view \\
assert that Congress limited the \\
delegates to amending the Articles of \\
Confederation. A review of legislative \\
history clearly reveals the error of this \\
claim. The Annapolis Convention, not \\
Congress, provided the political impetus 

for calling the Constitutional Convention. \\
The delegates from the 5 states \\
participating at Annapolis concluded \\
that a broader convention was needed \\
to address the nation’s concerns. They \\
named the time and date (Philadelphia; \\
second Monday in May).

The Annapolis delegates said they \\
were going to work to “procure the \\
concurrence of the other States in the \\
appointment of Commissioners.” The \\
goal of the upcoming convention was \\
//“to render the constitution of the Federal \\
Government adequate for the exigencies of \\
the Union.”//

What role was Congress to play in calling \\
the Convention? None. The Annapolis \\
delegates sent copies of their resolution to \\
Congress solely //“from motives of respect.”//

What authority did the Articles of \\
Confederation give to Congress to call \\
such a Convention? None. The power of \\
Congress under the Articles was strictly 

limited, and there was no theory of \\
implied powers. The states possessed \\
residual sovereignty which included the \\
power to call this convention.

**Seven state legislatures agreed to \\
send delegates to the Constitutional \\
Convention prior to the time that \\
Congress acted to endorse it. **The \\
states told their delegates that the \\
purpose of the Convention was the one \\
stated in the Annapolis Convention \\
resolution:// “to render the constitution of //

//the Federal Government adequate for the \\
exigencies of the Union.//”\\
Congress voted to endorse this \\
Convention on February 21, 1787. It did \\
not purport to “call” the Convention \\
or give instructions to the delegates. It \\
merely proclaimed that “in the opinion \\
of Congress, it is expedient” for the \\
Convention to be held in Philadelphia on \\
the date informally set by the Annapolis \\
Convention and formally approved by 7 \\
state legislatures.

Ultimately, 12 states appointed delegates. \\
Ten of these states followed the phrasing \\
of the Annapolis Convention with only \\
minor variations in wording (//“render \\
the Federal Constitution adequate”//). Two \\
states, New York and Massachusetts, \\
followed the formula stated by Congress \\
(//“solely amend the Articles” as well as \\
“render the Federal Constitution adequate”//).

Every student of history should know \\
that the instructions for delegates came \\
from the states. In Federalist 40, James \\
Madison answered the question of //“who \\
gave the binding instructions to the delegates.”// \\
He said: //“The powers of the convention \\
ought, in strictness, to be determined by an \\
inspection of the commissions given to the \\
members by their respective constituents //[i.e. \\
the states].//”// He then spends the balance \\
of Federalist 40 proving that the delegates \\
from all 12 states properly followed the \\
directions they were given by each of \\
their states. According to Madison, the 

**We can’t walk\\
boldly into our\\
future, without\\
first understanding\\
our history.**

//Continued on back page //



{{:cb_mirror_public:media:files_12852_pdfto002.png?nolink&918x1188 |background image}}
February 21st resolution from Congress \\
was merely //“a recommendatory act.”//

The States, not Congress, called the \\
Constitutional Convention. They told their \\
delegates to render the Federal Constitution \\
adequate for the exigencies of the Union. \\
And that is exactly what they did.

**The Ratification Process Was\\
Properly Changed**

The Articles of Confederation required any \\
amendments to be approved by Congress \\
and ratified by all 13 state legislatures. \\
Moreover, the Annapolis Convention \\
and a clear majority of the states insisted \\
that any amendments coming from the \\
Constitutional Convention would have \\
to be approved in this same manner—by \\
Congress and all 13 state legislatures.

The reason for this rule can be found in the \\
principles of international law. At the time, \\
the states were sovereigns. The Articles of \\
Confederation were, in essence, a treaty \\
between 13 sovereign nations. Normally, \\
the only way changes in a treaty can be \\
ratified is by the approval of all parties \\
to the treaty.

However, a treaty can provide for something \\
less than unanimous approval if all the 

parties agree to a new approval process \\
before it goes into effect. This is exactly \\
what the Founders did.\\
When the Convention sent its draft of \\
the Constitution to Congress, it also \\
recommended a new ratification process. \\
Congress approved both the Constitution \\
itself and the new process.

Along with changing the number of required \\
states from 13 to 9, the new ratification \\
process required that state conventions \\
ratify the Constitution rather than state \\
legislatures. This was done in accord \\
with the preamble of the Constitution—\\
the Supreme Law of the Land would be \\
ratified in the name of //“We the People”// \\
rather than //“We the States.”//

**But before this change in ratification \\
could be valid, all 13 state legislatures \\
would also have to consent to the new \\
method. All 13 state legislatures did \\
just this by calling conventions of the \\
people to vote on the merits of the \\
Constitution.**

Twelve states held popular elections to \\
vote for delegates. Rhode Island made \\
every voter a delegate and held a series of \\
town meetings to vote on the Constitution. \\
Thus, every state legislature consented \\
to the new ratification process thereby \\
validating the Constitution’s requirements 

for ratification.

**Those who claim to be constitutionalists \\
while contending that the Constitution \\
was illegally adopted are undermining \\
themselves. It is like saying George \\
Washington was a great American hero, \\
but he was also a British spy. I stand \\
with the integrity of our Founders who \\
properly drafted and properly ratified \\
the Constitution.**

**Website: ConventionOfStates.com | E-mail: info@ConventionOfStates.com**

**Phone: (540) 441-7227 | www.Facebook.com/ConventionOfStates | Twitter: @COSProject**

**The Constitution was  \\
legally adopted. Now, \\
let’s move on to getting \\
our nation back to the \\
greatness the Founders \\
originally envisioned.**