If the president and a court do not agree with a constitutional amendment, there are several actions they can consider, but their options are limited due to the nature of constitutional amendments and the constitutional framework of the United States.
-
Legislative Action (for the President): The president cannot unilaterally change a constitutional amendment, but they can advocate for a new amendment or for the repeal of an existing one. This would require the support of Congress and, ultimately, ratification by the states. The process for amending the Constitution is outlined in Article V, which requires a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress or a national convention called by two-thirds of state legislatures.
-
Judicial Interpretation (for the Courts): Courts, particularly the Supreme Court, can interpret constitutional amendments in ways that may limit their impact or relevance. This interpretation can effectively alter the practical implications of an amendment, though it does not change the text itself. Courts can rule on cases that challenge specific applications of an amendment, thereby setting legal precedents that may shift its practical understanding.
-
Public Advocacy and Political Action: Both the president and the courts can engage in public advocacy to influence public opinion. The president can use their platform to promote legislative changes or the need for a new amendment. Courts can also indirectly influence public opinion through their rulings and the discussions that follow.
-
Constitutional Convention: As provided in Article V, states can call for a constitutional convention to propose amendments. If there is a significant movement among the states, this could lead to changes to the Constitution that either support or nullify the existing amendment in question.
Ultimately, changes to the Constitution, once an amendment has been ratified, require a broad consensus, reflecting the significance and permanence of constitutional law.
1 answer