Constitutional convention proponents to meet in Indiana Statehouse

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The movement to convene a constitutional convention aimed at reining in the power of the federal government is coming to Indianapolis June 12 and 13.

The Mount Vernon Assembly, an organization actively pushing states to hold a convention as allowed under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, will be meeting at the Statehouse. More than 100 state legislators from 33 states are expected to attend the two-day event.

Indiana Senate President Pro Tempore David Long will open the meeting Thursday by welcoming the visitors and offering brief remarks in the House of Representatives chamber.

The Fort Wayne Republican launched his own effort during the 2013 legislative session for an Article V constitutional convention. He proposed that the convention would offer amendments to limit both the commerce clause and the federal taxing authority.

At the time, Long framed his effort as a “thoughtful and constitutionally based approach to how we can protect states’ rights.”

Long’s twin bills pertaining to a constitutional convention sailed through both chambers and were signed by Gov. Mike Pence in May 2013. Senate Enrolled Act 224 described the duties of the delegates who attend the convention while Senate Enrolled Act 225 outlined the method for appointing delegates and alternative delegates.

The Senate president touted the bills as keeping a tight control on the delegates and preventing a runaway convention.

His resolution, that would have made an application to Congress to call for a Constitutional convention, stalled in the House Committee on the Judiciary.

During the Indianapolis meeting, the Mount Vernon Assembly will be continuing to establish the rules and procedures needed to hold a state-led constitutional convention. The attendees will not be considering any proposed amendments.

The Mount Vernon Assembly, which describes itself as a bipartisan group of state legislators from across the country, was founded in December 2013 at George Washington’s Mount Vernon home in Virginia.

A resolution that established the organization asserted states have “slowly relinquished power to the national government” which has led to the federal government being unresponsive and unaccountable. The group sees an Article V constitutional convention as a way for states to regain the power to resolve national issues.



Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.