ILNews

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.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. YES I WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH MY YOUNGEST SON PEOPLE NEED TO LEAVE US ALONE WITH DCS IF WE ARE NOT HURTING OR NEGLECT OUR CHILDREN WHY ARE THEY EVEN CALLED OUT AND THE PEOPLE MAKING FALSE REPORTS NEED TO GO TO JAIL AND HAVE A CLASS D FELONY ON THERE RECORD TO SEE HOW IT FEELS. I WENT THREW ALOT WHEN HE WAS TAKEN WHAT ELSE DOES THESE SCHOOL WANT ME TO SERVE 25 YEARS TO LIFE ON LIES THERE TELLING OR EVEN LE SAME THING LIED TO THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR JUST SO I WOULD GET ARRESTED AND GET TIME HE THOUGHT AND IT TURNED OUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO NOT PROUD OF WHAT HAPPEN AND SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SEEKING MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR MY CHILD I AM DISABLED AND SICK OF GETTING TREATED BADLY HOW WOULD THEY LIKE IT IF I CALLED APS ON THEM FOR A CHANGE THEN THEY CAN COME AND ARREST THEM RIGHT OUT OF THE SCHOOL. NOW WE ARE HOMELESS AND THE CHILDREN ARE STAYING WITH A RELATIVE AND GUARDIAN AND THE SCHOOL WON'T LET THEM GO TO SCHOOL THERE BUT WANT THEM TO GO TO SCHOOL WHERE BULLYING IS ALLOWED REAL SMART THINKING ON A SCHOOL STAFF.

  2. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  3. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  4. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  5. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

ADVERTISEMENT