Rep. Doug Collins to introduce constitutional amendment to prohibit Supreme Court packing

[mystery-ak]

Rep. Doug Collins to introduce constitutional amendment to prohibit Supreme Court packing
'We can protect our nation’s highest court from becoming a political football,' Collins said

By Brooke Singman | Fox News

 Rep. Doug Collins says he plans to introduce a constitutional amendment to prohibit a change to the size to the Supreme Court until 10 years after enactment of any legislation that would alter the number of seats on the high court.

The legislation, which Collins, R-Ga., is set to roll out this week, comes after Democrats have threatened to pack the Supreme Court if President Trump nominates a pick to fill the vacancy left by late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

“Democrats’ latest threat to pack the Supreme Court throws our nation’s history to the wayside in pursuit of political gain and threatens the very foundation of our democracy,” Collins said in a statement Monday.

There's a high bar to passing an amendment: In order to pass, a constitutional amendment must receive approval from two-thirds of the House and Senate, as well as ratification from three-fourths of all states, or 38 out of 50.

Collins noted that since 1869, the Supreme Court has held “exactly nine seats.”

more
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rep-doug-collins-to-introduce-constitutional-amendment-to-prohibit-supreme-court-packing   

[Fishrrman]

Nice gesture, but goin' nowhere.

Probably no one will respond to this post, but I've been thinking about something lately.

Suppose... just suppose... that a "proposed Constitutional amendment" appeared before 34 or 35 state legislatures.

Suppose that it came "out of the blue" -- that is, not passed by the Congress, and not emanating from an Article V Convention of the States. Suppose it just "fell out of the sky" and landed on the desks of the state legislatures.

And suppose that the required number of states (is it 34?) then decided to hold ratification votes and all of them "ratified" the amendment proposal that had appeared before them.

Would such procedure be enough to "ratify" the new amendment?
Even though it had not come from Congress or an Article V convention?

What "ratifies" and codifies an amendment, and makes it valid?
Is it the "entire process" including who wrote it?
Or... is it simply the "collective ratification votes" of the required number of state legislatures...?

Just askin' ...

[sneakypete]

Just askin' ..

@Fishrrman

And I wish I had an informed,educated answer,

Unfortunately,I am not a lawyur and have never even played one on teebee,so all I can offer is  a WAG.

My WAG tells me that like everything else legal,if you miss an apostrophe or dotting an "i" in a legal document it is trashed,failing to follow the established procedure/routine pretty much guarantees it will never be accepted.

Or at least I hope that is what would happen. 

[jmyrlefuller]

Nice gesture, but goin' nowhere.

Probably no one will respond to this post, but I've been thinking about something lately.

Suppose... just suppose... that a "proposed Constitutional amendment" appeared before 34 or 35 state legislatures.

Suppose that it came "out of the blue" -- that is, not passed by the Congress, and not emanating from an Article V Convention of the States. Suppose it just "fell out of the sky" and landed on the desks of the state legislatures.

And suppose that the required number of states (is it 34?) then decided to hold ratification votes and all of them "ratified" the amendment proposal that had appeared before them.

Would such procedure be enough to "ratify" the new amendment?
Even though it had not come from Congress or an Article V convention?

What "ratifies" and codifies an amendment, and makes it valid?
Is it the "entire process" including who wrote it?
Or... is it simply the "collective ratification votes" of the required number of state legislatures...?

Just askin' ...

It is the entire process.