why are the later amendments questionable. I have a moderate interest in law (that i may eventually pursue), and i don’t know why they are questionable. So long as 2/3 of Federal Congress agrees and 3/4 of State legislatures, pretty much anything can be an amendment.
The constitution cannot be in conflict with it’s self. For a new amendment to occur, it must not conflict with any others, and the actual constitutional body it’s self. If I have the right to life liberty and the persuit of happyness, then why can’t I hold foreign positions of nobility and run for office? For an amendment to be constitutional, it must be legally ratified and not conflict any others. What if congress ratified an amendment saying “You do not have the right to freedom of expression”? If every senetor and his mother voted yes on this one, it would still be pure bullshit. Unfortunatly, a constitution cannot protect you unless it is enforced.
actually amendment means alter or change. Theoretically someone could make a new amendment doing away with the 1st 2nd 3rd and 4th. Look at the prohibiton amendments. they are at odds with each other. Technically anything can be an amendment so long as it gets the 2/3 congressional and 3/4s state assemblies at a consitution convention. Hell, they could amend the constitution to instate a king and do away w/ congress. Would this ever happen, no. and if it did i would move to europe long before it did.
Colin:
I don’t know where you got the idea that constitutional amendments can’t “conflict” with prior amendments or the original document. “Amend” means, among other things, “change.” The Constitution sets out the procedure for the proposal and ratification of amendments. If those procedures are followed, an amendment is valid, no matter whether it changes some preexisting part of the Constituion or just adds to it. Case in point: the 13th amendment prohibits involuntary servitude (i.e., slavery), which was recognized and allowed by the Constitution as originally ratified by the states. So, unlikely as it seems, if enough senators chose to vote to propose and enough states chose to vote to ratify an amendment repealing the First Amendment, it would be a valid action.