Talk:List of amendments to the Constitution of the United States

Actual Amendments

Why aren't the actual Amendments listed in the List of Amendments? There are only summaries...which are open for interpretation.Really Old Roger (talk) 23:52, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@Really Old Roger: Because this is just a list, and the purpose of the list is to provide summary information. Readers wanting the full text can readily find it elsewhere. —C.Fred (talk) 00:01, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

In addition, in a number of cases there are multiple versions of an amendment, with subtle changes in wording and/or capitalization (see Second Amendment to the United States Constitution for an example). The explanatory text describes, in plain English terms, the subject of the amendment, and its net effect, rather than its verbiage. P.S. - If the verbatim wording of Constitutional amendments didn't allow, and in many cases require, interpretation, we wouldn't need Constitutional scholars. General Ization ^Talk 00:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I see in you response that the the Amendments are not listed in this article but there is column with a summery of the Amendment. There are two points to look at in regard to this. One is that the article name is "List of amendments to the United States Constitution" but the article does not have a actual list of the Amendments only a summary. when people are going through the article it would be easy mistake to think that the text in the summary field is the actual Amendment. The second issue is in regard to the second Amendment, the summary text is "Protects the right to keep and bear arms" and there is nothing to explain that right of the states to organise a regulated militia. I can see other Amendment summaries do cover each part of the Amendment so not sure why it might have been missed on the second.Deanmc84 (talk) 01:22, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 June 2018

Some of the amendments listed are not representative of the US Constitution. Please refer to https://usconstitution.net/const.html and read the amendments' section and please list the amendments verbatim. By not doing so you invite misinterpretation and the proponency to rewrite history. 95.233.186.243 (talk) 08:47, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: None of these are listed verbatim, to do so would take an exceptionally large amount of space and would render this page unhelpful; the 20th and the 25th are prime example of long amendments that would leave the table unusable. Was there a particular one you had an issue with that you feel is inappropriately listed? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:46, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

The 13th Amendment

Was the 13th amendment proposed in 1865? I don't think so. Lincoln began his speech with "4 score and 7 years ago" (87 years ago) which was when the Declaration of Independence was formed (1776). 1865-87=1778 and that's 2 years off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NDEdminson (talk • contribs) 20:39, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@NDEdminson: I believe that you are conflating two separate things. The Thirteenth Amendment was indeed submitted to the states for ratification in 1865 – on February 1, 1865. The phrase "four score and seven years ago" is from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, which he delivered on November 19, 1863 – 1863−87=1776. Drdpw (talk) 01:56, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Gettysburg Address? I completely forgot about that. NDEdminson (talk) 04:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Unratified amendments

I had a hell of a time finding Wikipedia’s list of failed attempts to secure ratification of proposed constitutional amendments. There were six such failed attempts in U.S. history, and the only place they are covered at Wikipedia is in this article, named “List of Amendments to the United States Constitution.” But those six instances do not involve an amendment, they involved failed attempt at amendment. So, if this article is going to have a crummy title that does not describe accurately the scope of this article, at least the hatnote should clear things up, right? Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:37, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

@Anythingyouwant: I hear your frustration. It's common to think of only the 27 ratified amendments when thinking of Amendments to the United States Constitution; however, the six that have gone unratified are also amendments. Perhaps a redirect such as "List of unratified amendments to the United States Constitution (redirected to this article) would be helpful to readers looking specifically for a list of failed/unratified amendments. Over the years these has been much discussion here this talk page, and at Talk:List of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution about scope and content of this page: List of amendments to the United States Constitution, and the scope and content of: List of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution. The hatnote at the top of each page is designed to help readers determine whether the information they are seeking is on this page or that page. How might they be tweaked so as to better answer the question "Am I on the right page?" Drdpw (talk) 23:25, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. I respectfully disagree that the article title is accurate, but I don’t want to quibble about it, because fixing the hatnote should be sufficient. I’ll just mention that the last amendment is the 27th Amendment, which no one calls the 32nd or 33rd Amendment. You can see right on this reliable book cover in a big red star the words “all 27 amendments”. Anyway, the hatnote currently says this:

“ This article is about the constitutional amendments approved by the U.S. Congress and sent to the states for ratification. For proposals to amend the U.S. Constitution introduced in but not approved by Congress, see List of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution. ”

It could be easily clarified this way:

“ This article is about the constitutional amendments approved by the U.S. Congress, whether or not they were later ratified by the states. For proposals to amend the U.S. Constitution introduced in but not approved by Congress, see List of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution. ”

Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:57, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Possibly; or, the scope of this article could be narrowed specifically to the "ratified amendments to the United States Constitution." If that were to happen, details concerning the unratified six would be moved to the other article. Drdpw (talk) 01:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Renaming the article like that would be my first choice (along with moving the content like you said). Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:19, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Hatnote wording idea – This article is about ratified and unratified amendments to the United States Constitution which have received the approval of the U.S. Congress. Drdpw (talk) 03:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Wording the hatnote like that would be my second choice, if renaming the article is disfavored. Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:19, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

I have tweaked the hatnote, as mentioned above. I have also created an unratified amendment list redirect (to this article). Drdpw (talk) 00:24, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Expiration of Ratification Period?

"Beginning in the early 20th century, Congress has usually, but not always, stipulated that an amendment must be ratified by the required number of states within seven years from the date of its submission to the states in order to become part of the Constitution. Congress's authority to set a ratification deadline was affirmed in 1939 by the United States Supreme Court in Coleman v. Miller (307 U.S. 433).[4]"

I've followed this link to the source, and it does NOT state that Congress has "usually, but not always" stipulated ratification was required within 7 years. It does state that the cited court case established that Congress does have the authority to set an expiration date for ratification, and accepted 7 years as a reasonable time period for said ratification.

Reviewing the links from this page for Amendments ratified since the beginning of the 20th century, 8 of them (16, 17, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27) had no set time period for ratification to be completed. 4 of them (18, 20, 21, 22) DID include an expiration date for the ratification process in the text of the amendment. Similarly, of the 3 unratified amendments proposed since the beginning of the 20th century, 2 (Child Labor and the ERA) did not include expiration text in the proposed amendment. The DC Voting amendment did.

It seems that the quoted text in the article needs to be re-written. Congress does have the authority to establish a time limit on ratification, which has usually been seven years, but usually has not done so.

Thank you for sharing your observation. I have modified the sentence to read: "Since the early 20th century, Congress has, on several occasions, stipulated... in order to become part of the Constitution." (PS: please sign your posts.) Drdpw (talk) 16:33, 26 June 2022 (UTC)