Talk:Corwin Amendment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Minor revision
A minor revision may be required in the first paragraph. Where it says that the amendment "would have forbidden the Federal Government from banning the practice of slavery," it should be qualified with the addition of a clause saying "in the existing states." (See the actual text of the resolution, at the bottom of the article.) This precise limitation (leaving the federal government still free to legislate for territories) was the essential qualification that allowed Republicans such as Corwin and Lincoln to support it as a compromise gesture. Note, too, that it did not prohibit any existing states from themselves ending slavery. Tlbenson 07:05, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] No further amendments?
The text states that the Constitution could not be subsequently modified on this point. Had it passed then could a "the Corwin amendment is hereby repealed" amendment have been valid? Timrollpickering 15:10, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Dead Link
I have removed the following link: Charlotte Observer: Lincoln and the 'Ghost Amendment' (10/25/06). This no longer links to the cited article. It only links to a page apologizing for not finding the cited article. --SMP0328. (talk) 06:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Still alive?
I believe Congress passed a law subsequent to 1976 in which they said that all amendments still circulating would have seven years to win approval, or die. The originally proposed first amendment won ratification prior to the expiration of the seven years, in 1992 (now the 27th Amendment) -- but all others are dead. Alas, of course, I can't find the law now.
Even apart from such a law, however, this article might benefit from addition of materials from the discussions on whether the amendment might be reinvigorated today. Here's the Findlaw discussion: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article05/02.html#4 Edarrell (talk) 09:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- The only Congressional acts, around that time, that dealt with Constitutional amendments are the extension of the time limit for ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment and the Congress's passage of the District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment (Section 4 of which required ratification within seven years). I am not aware of any law that would end the ability to ratify the Corwin Amendment. Here's an article from 2004 still referring to the Corwin Amendment as still being capable of being adopted. --SMP0328. (talk) 19:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Same-sex marriage?
Would this amendment also apply to same-sex marriage and other similar issues under the wide rubric of "domestic institutions," preventing adoption of the Federal Marriage Amendment? As it uses the phrase "including" it would seem to cover quite a lot. Poochner (talk) 16:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
