The Other Amendments

Ted Carter

Follow

Feb 23, 2017 · 28 min read

Note: This is part of an ongoing written piece following the discussion of The Bill of Rights in this same Publication.

The Constitution was ratified in 1788, and the Bill of Rights were added in 1789. What about the the other Amendments? Amendment XI was ratified in 1795, and the last Amendment (XXVII) was ratified in 1992.

Here we go.

Amendment XI

Passed by Congress March 4, 1794. Ratified February 7, 1795.

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

This Amendment modifies Article III, Section 2, which is about trial by jury. It reads:

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

So if I’m reading that right, this Amendment was to clarify that the United States government has no jurisdiction over cases where a State is the defendant and one or more citizens of another state or another country are the prosecutors. This is related to the notion of sovereign immunity; which indicates that states cannot be sued in federal court without their consent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_United_States#State_sovereign_immunity_in_federal_courts

Amendment XII

Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.

The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; — the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; — The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

This language supersedes the following portion of Article II, Section 1:

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice-President.

Apparently (according to Wikipedia), the original process of selecting a President and Vice President via the Electoral College caused a problem in both the 1796 and the 1800 elections (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution). The problem, essentially, was that the rules made it possible for the President and Vice-President chosen to be from different political parties, and in fact made it likely that the Vice-President chosen would be a defeated opponent. Further, the process made it fairly easy for votes to result in a tie.

So, this Amendment makes the following changes:

1. The President and Vice-President are to be voted for separately.
2. The Vice-President must meet the same requirements as the President in order to hold office.
3. If no candidate for President has a majority of votes, the House of Representatives choose the three candidates with the highest number of votes (rather than five candidates).
4. If no candidate for Vice-President has a majority of votes, the Senate will choose from the two candidates with the highest number of votes.
5. If the House cannot choose a President, the current Vice-President will serve as President.

This language gets further amended by the 20th Amendment, so we’ll come back to this one. But what we seem to have here is essentially a “clean-up” amendment to prevent process issues, and to increase the likelihood that the President and Vice-President would be able to work together effectively.

Skimming ahead, I think we will find that many of these amendments are more about specifying or clarifying processes and policies. I don’t intend to spend a lot of time talking about the “letter of the law,” since our real aim was to talk more about the intent. We’ll just see how it goes…

The thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amendments are known collectively as the Reconstruction Amendments (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstruction_Amendments). They were adopted in the five years immediately following, and were a direct result of, the Civil War.

Amendment XIII

Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.

Section 1.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

This amendment supersedes the following language from Article IV, section 2:

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

No slavery. Slavery is bad. That is pretty clear.

And this was passed in 1865. Okay, let’s talk about that for a minute. If you type “civil war dates” in Google, you get the following: “April 12, 1861 — May 9, 1865.” Further checking shows that May 9, 1865 was when President Andrew Johnson issued a proclamation indicating the Civil War was over. So, this legislation was drafted before the proclamation, and was ratified approximately seven months after.

And this is where you would expect me to add some snarky comment about the fact that this legislation was passed over 100 years and it seems at times like we have made very little headway in treating black Americans equally to non-black Americans. I would, but it really isn’t funny, ya know?

Also note that this amendment touches on the notion of imprisonment or detainment without being “duly convicted” of a crime; as “slavery nor involuntary servitude” is close to imprisonment; both are tied to forcing individuals to do things.

Amendment XIV

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Do you hear that, politicians? All persons born or naturalized are citizens and cannot be denied life, liberty, property, or the equal protection of the law. Doesn’t matter what they look like, where they work, who they vote for, or anything else. Pretty darn clear as far as I’m concerned.

Wikipedia cites four clauses in this section; the Citizenship, Privileges or Immunities, Due Process, and Equal Protection clauses. The Citizenship Clause enabled former slaves to become citizens, the Privileges or Immunities Clause reinforces the notion that a citizen of one state should have the same rights as citizens of any other state, the Due Process Clause ensures that state and local governments also may not infringe on citizens rights without legislative authority to do so, and the Equal Protection Clause ensures that all citizens are protected equally (and was the basis for Brown vs. Board of Education) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution).

Remember how I said just awhile back that I thought most of the Amendments moving forward were mainly focused on minutiae? I was wrong.

Section 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by this section, and in turn this section was further changed by Section 1 of the 26th Amendment. The affected portion reads as follows:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

The clarification here is that any person (and by person I mean male over 21) is denied the right to vote in the presidential elections, or has their right to vote restricted in some other way, they will not be included in the count to determine the number of Representatives for that state.

Kinda funny that this immediately follows a section promoting equal rights for all citizens.

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Insurrection or rebellion, huh? In other words, in the context of the Civil War, no Confederate officer can run for office unless Congress approves them by a 2/3rd vote. Looks like the last time this one was used was in 1920 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution).

Section 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

This section indicates that any debt incurred by the North in fighting the South would be honored and paid, but any debt incurred by the South to fight the North would be considered void.

Section 5.

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, not only is this law, but we’re actually going to enforce it!

If you spend some time researching this further, you will see that the end of slavery was highly contested, and this legislation was put in place to try and address the complaints and enforce the decision.

Amendment XV

Passed by Congress February 26, 1869. Ratified February 3, 1870, the last of the three Reconstruction Amendments is a short one.

Section 1.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude —

Amendment XIII outlawed slavery. Amendment XIV indicated that all (male) citizens have equal rights. Amendment XV says that no one can be prevented from voting based on previous servitude, race, or color.

Section 2.

The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

And again they included specific language saying Congress has the power to enforce.

I will say that some language in the Constitution is vague and leaves a lot of room for interpretation. This one, in my opinion, does not.

Amendment XVI

Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

This Amendment modifies the language in Article I, Section 9, which reads:

No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

This Amendment, then, allows taxes to be charged on income without consideration given to the population of the states. I looked at Wikipedia for more info, but the description there didn’t make sense to me. I looked instead to the explanation from the National Constitution Center (http://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendments/amendment-xvi). Their description indicated this amendment allows the federal government to require taxes based on personal income rather than on the percent of the population made up by individuals’ states of residence.

In other words, before this amendment, if a particular state made up 10% of the total U.S. population, then only 10% of the total taxes collected by the federal government could come from that state. After, taxes would be based on the percent of the total income earned by the citizens of that state instead.

This seems like a reasonable change, but as we all know the percent of peoples’ incomes that should be taxed is a constant debate.

Amendment XVII

Passed by Congress May 13, 1912. Ratified April 8, 1913.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

This Amendment modifies Article I, Section 3, which reads as follows:

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.

No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

The big change here is that the Senators are to be elected by the people instead of chosen by the state Legislatures. It also says that the eligibility requirements for voting for Senators should be the same as those for being electors for the state’s largest legislative branch.

It further states that the Executive branch of the state can make temporary appointments until elections can be held (similar to the previous language).

This, in my opinion, is an important Amendment in that it further establishes a link between citizen and federal elections instead of a system where the citizens are connected to federal elections by way of the state legislature or some other electoral intermediary.

Amendment XVIII

This one was passed by Congress December 18, 1917. Ratified January 16, 1919. It was later repealed by amendment 21.

Section 1.

After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

Section 2.

The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Section 3.

This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

The Prohibition. I suspect I know about as much on the history of this as most folks; alcohol was made illegal and Hollywood tells us it was a sexy time of speakeasies, gangsters, and pinstripe suits. That’s about all I’ve got. I peeked at Wikipedia and it didn’t give me much else.

However, this is an interesting Amendment for two reasons. One, it is later repealed, which is unique among these Amendments.

Second, it is the first language I have seen in all of the documents we’ve reviewed that I can think of which deals mainly with self-harm. We talked about the 2nd Amendment and the notion of restricting possession of guns based on the fear of people harming each other. Restriction of alcohol is different in that it is something that people use to harm themselves.

Of course, today we can say that alcohol is directly related to the public health based largely on the notion of drunk driving, but in 1919 vehicular manslaughter was not nearly as big of an issue, so I would assume that the focus here was more on the concerns of people harming themselves.

It is also an Amendment that I would argue brings us back to our original focus of church versus state. The Temperance Movement is closely tied to the Christian notion that imbibing alcohol is a sin.

Today, I don’t hear much about changes to legislation related to alcohol, but it would seem that there are more and more laws past restricting the use of tobacco while at the same time more legislation making the use of marijuana less restricted. Looking at the science, this would seem reasonable given the relative harm each substance has been proven to do to the human body.

Nonetheless this could get us into extensive discussion related to the purpose of government, and whether the protection of an individual’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness extends to actions the individual may do that threatens these things for him or herself.

However, I wonder how much consideration was given to children when this legislation was enacted. Concerns with underage drinking, smoking, and drug use are often used now when discussing laws related to them, so it might be that the Prohibition was partially motivated by concerns for the kids. But the cynic in me suspects it was more to do with religion.

Amendment XIX

Passed by Congress June 4, 1919. Ratified August 18, 1920.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

We move straight from The Prohibition to Suffrage. Let’s think about this for a moment. Here is a timeline of the major events we’ve talked about so far:

• 1492 — Columbus
• 1620 — Mayflower Compact
• 1776 — Declaration of Independence
• 1781 — Articles of Confederation
• 1788 — The Constitution
• 1791 — Bill of Rights
• 1865 — Slavery Abolished
• 1868 — Equality for all natural and naturalized citizens
• 1870 — No discrimination based on race or color
• 1920 — No discrimination based on gender

This means our government recognized that treating some people as property is wrong approximately 150 years ago, that treating people differently based on color or race was wrong 145 years ago, and that treating people differently based on gender was wrong 95 years ago. Less than 100 years ago, our government was still telling us that women were lesser humans than men.

I guess I will say this was a move in the right direction, but it is sad to me that it took us this long.

Amendment XX

Passed by Congress March 2, 1932. Ratified January 23, 1933, Amendment 20 deals with moving the beginning and ending terms of the President, Vice-President, and members of Congress.

Section 1.

The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

This section modifies Article I, Section 4, which reads as follows:

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.

So Congress moved Congress’s opening day from December to January.

Section 3.

If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

If the elected President dies before he can take office, and a new qualified candidate is not selected, the elected Vice-President will become president unless he is not qualified, in which case Congress will need to pass laws determining how to handle the issue. I like this one because it clearly states, “We didn’t cover all possibilities, but we don’t really expect this situation to arise. If it does, you are on your own…”

Section 4.

The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

This section also supercedes a portion of the 12th Amendment, which we discussed earlier in this chapter. The portion in question reads as follows:

And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.

This removes language related to the House of Representatives selecting a President and the Senate choosing a Vice-President.

Section 5.

Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.

Section 6.

This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.

These last two sections deal with when the Amendment is to go into effect, and what kind of vote is required to pass.

In general, this might seem like minutiae, but like Amendment 17 it is significant in that it clarifies the legislative branch’s limits of power when it comes to selecting the President and Vice-President.

Amendment XXI

Passed by Congress February 20, 1933. Ratified December 5, 1933, this Amendment ends the Prohibition.

Section 1.

The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2.

The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

So, instead of saying:

The manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

It says that transporting or importing alcohol into any area within the United States in such a way that would violate that area’s laws is prohibited.

Section 3.

This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

It is interesting that they allowed for up to seven years for this one to be ratified, but it took less than one. Looks like it wasn’t too difficult for the legislative branch to agree that outlawing alcohol was a bad idea.

Amendment XXII

Passed by Congress March 21, 1947. Ratified February 27, 1951.

Section 1.

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section 2.

This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

This is another amendment that seems fairly straightforward, but I must say I am surprised that this did not become a rule until the 50’s. It says that no one can hold the office of President for more than two terms. The rest is clarification on this point when it comes to the President who is in office when it is passed and when someone has to finish the term for an elected President for whatever reason.

Amendment XXIII

Passed by Congress June 16, 1960. Ratified March 29, 1961.

Section 1.

The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Section 2.

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

This amendment gives Washington D.C. electors for President and Vice President. The calculation should be the same as for an actual state with the stipulation that D.C. can’t have more electors than the least populous State.

Amendment XXIV

Passed by Congress August 27, 1962. Ratified January 23, 1964.

Section 1.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2.

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

This amendment says you can’t restrict people from voting because they haven’t paid their taxes.

I can see arguments both for and against this amendment. On one side, it seems reasonable to expect citizens to support their country financially if they are going to have a say in who the elected representatives are. On the other hand, without this rule you run the risk of discriminating against the poor who do not have the money to pay their taxes.

Looking to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution), it seems that this amendment was focused on poll taxes, which several southern states had in place to restrict black voters. In this sense, I see the amendment as very appropriate.

But I still have to wonder about the issue of property or income tax. Does it not make sense to say that you have to pay your taxes, or provide proof that you are not able to pay your taxes, before you can vote? I don’t want to support the notion of voter restrictions given the flim flam that has been committed in recent years to try and restrict the voting rights of immigrants and other groups, but I would like to see some way to prevent wealthy folks from getting away with not paying their fare share and yet still greatly influencing elections in this country. Who says you can’t have it all?

Amendment XXV

Passed by Congress July 6, 1965. Ratified February 10, 1967, this amendment replaces Article II, Section 1, which reads as follows:

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

The amendment clarifies the previous language and provides rules for what happens when the Vice President position becomes vacant.

Section 1.

In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

Note that this section does not include the previous language about a President becoming unable to discharge its duties.

Section 2.

Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

The Vice President can be replaced by a Presidential nomination and a majority vote of the legislature.

Section 3.

Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

Here is the inability clause. If a President indicates he cannot perform his duties, the Vice President will serve as Acting President until the President indicates he is once again able to serve. This allows for temporary situations such as illness that would prevent a President from serving.

Section 4.

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Here we have language for situations where others feel the President is unable to fulfil his duties. If the Vice President and whichever groups that the law allows indicate the President is incapable, the Vice President will become Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

Obviously if others declare the President incapable, the President might disagree. The President can resume his duties if he indicates to the legislature that he is capable unless the Vice President and the group specified in law present reasons he should not. If reasons are provided, Congress will vote to determine whether the President can resume his duties or whether the Vice President should continue to serve as Acting President.

Any guesses on what prompted this Amendment? Would it help if I mentioned that John F. Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963?

Amendment XXVI

Passed by Congress March 23, 1971. Ratified July 1, 1971, this Amendment modified Amendment 14, section 2, which reads as follows:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This amendment did not specify any ages. The twenty sixth amendment takes care of that:

Section 1.

The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

Section 2.

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Prior to this amendment, there was a great deal of debate about whether 18 or 21 should be the legal voting age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution). Enough said.

Amendment XXVII

Originally proposed Sept. 25, 1789. Ratified May 7, 1992.

No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.

Note that this Amendment came twenty years after Amendment twenty-six. It specifies that at least one Representatives vote has to happen in between when Congress votes to change compensation for legislators and when legislators actually see the change in compensation. This makes it less likely for representatives to vote for pay increases for themselves without a valid reason other than to get more money for themselves. It also allows voters to work to remove legislators who they feel have voted to increase their own pay without merit.

Summary

So there you have them; all twenty-seven Amendments. All the times since the Constitution became law that people felt the language needed to be changed. Let’s review. What have the Amendments changed?

1. Laws cannot be established that restrict citizens’ rights of religion, freedom of speech, press, assembly, or petition.
2. People have the right to protect themselves and their country.
3. Soldiers cannot have sleepovers without the homeowner’s consent.
4. Citizens are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures and judicially sanctioned warrants based on probable cause are required.
5. People cannot be required to testify against themselves in a criminal case.
6. Citizens have the right to a speedy trial conducted publicly, to be judged by an impartial jury, to be tried where the crime was committed, to be told what you are being accused of, to be given the chance to have witnesses testify on your behalf, and to have a lawyer.
7. People have a right to a trial by jury for civil cases involving at least $20.
8. Bail, fines, and punishment have to fit the crime.
9. If a right is not specifically stated, it does not mean the federal government has that right by default.
10. If a right is not specifically stated for the U.S. Government, that right belongs either to the states or to the people.
11. The federal government cannot preside over cases involving one or more individual states as defendants.
12. The President and Vice President should be elected in such a way to increase the likelihood that they can work together effectively.
13. Slavery and indentured servitude are against the law.
14. All persons born or naturalized are citizens and cannot be denied life, liberty, property, or the equal protection of the law.
15. No one can be prevented from voting based on previous servitude, race, or color.
16. Taxes are not to be based on the percent of the population made up by the citizen’s state of residence.
17. Senators are to be elected by the people instead of chosen by the state Legislatures.
18. Alcohol is illegal.
19. Women have equal voting rights to men.
20. If the elected President dies before he takes office, the elected Vice President will become President.
21. Just kidding on #18. Alcohol isn’t illegal at the federal level.
22. No one can hold the office of President for more than two terms.
23. Residents of D.C. can vote for President and Vice President like the states.
24. You can’t prevent people from voting because they haven’t paid their taxes.
25. The Vice President and the federal government have ways to ensure the President is fit to serve and to replace him if not.
26. Anyone over the age of 18 has a right to vote.
27. Legislatures have restrictions on voting to increase their own wages.

As we mentioned before, some of these Amendments are really just clarifications and specifications, but the Bill of Rights and Amendments like the 13th, 15th, and 19th brought some significant updates to the Constitution in terms of the rights of the people. Others provided more specifics on how the legal process should work, how to ensure appropriate representation, and how taxes work.

Next time, we will start discussing The Federalist Papers.