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. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT