Ask Lemmy

27156 readers

2249 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

What does it take to get a constitutional amendment ratified in the U.S.? (self.asklemmy)

submitted 7 months ago by LesserAbe to c/asklemmy

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I don't mean the actual rules of passing it, I mean what organization, activities and funding are necessary to do so.

The last one passed was in 1992 and it was just about congressional pay. Last one before that was 1971. Is there some kind of play book? It seems to happen so infrequently that it would be hard to study and conditions would vary enough that the last effort wouldn't be useful as a model.

("The amendment process is very difficult and time consuming: A proposed amendment must be passed by two-thirds of both houses of Congress, then ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states." Link)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] captainlezbian 8 points 7 months ago

First you’d need to unfuck American politics. Like actually. Anything that isn’t drastically necessary and completely unpolitical or wildly popular and supported by a party representing a significant majority of people and states.

To put it into context: this is the equal rights amendment and it was a political shit show. Its text is uncontroversal, already was the law, and also very necessary as when it was proposed women not being fully independent people in the eyes of the law was in living memory. The equal rights amendment is not a part of the United States constitution. Some states repealed ratification. If you want to understand why no amendments will happen the means for that to happen were built to kill the ERA. Modern extreme factionalism and the American right wing committing to antifeminism as a political stance were part of this.

We still need the ERA, it provides protection to everyone regardless of gender by demanding the government treat them regardless of gender. But we need more amendments, more controversial ones, like an explicit right to privacy that no court nor legislature can violate.

I doubt America will survive long enough to get another amendment