Article V:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Following the Convention, the debates over ratifying the Constitution briefly touched upon Article V’s procedures for amending the nation’s charter. Federalists, who generally supported a strong central government, argued that Article V’s high vote thresholds for proposing and ratifying amendments would protect the Constitution from destructive changes, while permitting amendments to address significant shortcomings in the document.1 Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, expressed concerns that Article V would make amending the Constitution too difficult once it was ratified.2 Consequently, they advocated for “amendments” to certain subjects prior to submitting the Constitution to the states.3 Federalists opposed such amendments as premature.4

After the states ratified the Constitution, debates continued over amendments, including the adoption of a Bill of Rights.5 In his 1789 Inaugural Address, President George Washington alluded to these ongoing debates, stating that the people of the United States would ultimately judge when it was appropriate to exercise “the occasional power delegated by the fifth article of the Constitution.” 6

Footnotes

1

The Federalist No. 43 (James Madison) ( “The mode preferred by the Convention seems to be stamped with every mark of propriety. It guards equally against that extreme facility, which would render the Constitution too mutable; and that extreme difficulty, which might perpetuate its discovered faults.” ). See also The Federalist No. 22 (Alexander Hamilton) ( “When the concurrence of a large number is required by the constitution to the doing of any national act, we are apt to rest satisfied that all is safe, because nothing improper will be likely to be done; but we forget how much good may be prevented, and how much ill may be produced, by the power of hindering the doing what may be necessary, and of keeping affairs in the same unfavorable posture in which they may happen to stand at particular periods.” ).

2

For insight into the Anti-Federalist position on this issue, see Centinel II, Freeman’s J. (Phila.), Oct. 24, 1787, reprinted in 2 The Complete Anti-Federalist (Herbert L. Storing ed., 1981).

3

See id.

4

See generally The Federalist No. 85 (Alexander Hamilton) (providing a broad overview of the debate).

5

See President George Washington, First Inaugural Address (Apr. 30, 1789).

6

See id.