{"status":"ok","message-type":"work-list","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"facets":{},"total-results":471009,"items":[{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,14]],"date-time":"2026-08-14T09:31:44Z","timestamp":1786699904217,"version":"build-2736575974"},"posted":{"date-parts":[[2022]]},"group-title":"SSRN","reference-count":0,"publisher":"Elsevier BV","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"<jats:p>Advocates of convening a convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution are pursuing a sophisticated campaign to convince state legislatures to petition Congress to call a convention under Article V of the Constitution. They believe the only way to restrain government spending, limit expanding federal power, and limit federal terms of office is to invoke Article V and amend the Constitution. Specifically, they seek to require Congress to call a convention to draft, debate, and approve proposed amendments to further their policy goals. Though the convention mode of amending the Constitution has never been invoked, those urging states to pursue this method predict the only amendments to come out of a convention would be ones consistent with their political philosophy and policy preferences. Opponents fear that once convened, a convention may produce proposed amendments that do not align with their preferred policy goals and may cause more harm than good. This article suggests that state legislators who are asked to vote to petition Congress for a convention should examine the historical record surrounding the adoption of the convention method in Article V, review the knowns and unknowns of the convention mode of amending the Constitution, and consider current political realities before supporting the movement to call a convention for proposing amendments.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.2139\/ssrn.4211852","type":"posted-content","created":{"date-parts":[[2022,9,13]],"date-time":"2022-09-13T16:10:21Z","timestamp":1663085421000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Caution and the Constitution: Should There Be an Article V Convention for Proposing Amendments?"],"prefix":"10.2139","author":[{"given":"William A.","family":"Woodruff","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"78","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,14]],"date-time":"2026-08-14T08:47:27Z","timestamp":1786697247000},"score":40.783768,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ssrn.com\/abstract=4211852"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2022]]},"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2139\/ssrn.4211852","published":{"date-parts":[[2022]]},"subtype":"preprint"},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,27]],"date-time":"2025-08-27T00:15:08Z","timestamp":1756253708498,"version":"3.44.0"},"posted":{"date-parts":[[2012,12,4]]},"group-title":"Article","reference-count":0,"publisher":"The Conversation","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"DOI":"10.64628\/aa.4ucjh6jwy","type":"posted-content","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,26]],"date-time":"2025-08-26T12:42:09Z","timestamp":1756212129000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Experts urge caution when rebuilding after disaster"],"prefix":"10.64628","member":"54080","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,26]],"date-time":"2025-08-26T12:44:15Z","timestamp":1756212255000},"score":22.24069,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/theconversation.com\/experts-urge-caution-when-rebuilding-after-disaster-11133"}},"editor":[{"given":"Sunanda","family":"Creagh","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"editor","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2012,12,4]]},"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.64628\/aa.4ucjh6jwy","published":{"date-parts":[[2012,12,4]]},"subtype":"other"},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,27]],"date-time":"2025-08-27T00:11:25Z","timestamp":1756253485442,"version":"3.44.0"},"posted":{"date-parts":[[2015,4,8]]},"group-title":"Article","reference-count":0,"publisher":"The Conversation","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"DOI":"10.64628\/aa.dmcnk5t4n","type":"posted-content","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,26]],"date-time":"2025-08-26T10:17:13Z","timestamp":1756203433000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Experts caution Australia on unilateral \u2018Google tax\u2019"],"prefix":"10.64628","member":"54080","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,26]],"date-time":"2025-08-26T10:17:54Z","timestamp":1756203474000},"score":22.15414,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/theconversation.com\/experts-caution-australia-on-unilateral-google-tax-39794"}},"editor":[{"given":"Charis","family":"Palmer","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"editor","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2015,4,8]]},"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.64628\/aa.dmcnk5t4n","published":{"date-parts":[[2015,4,8]]},"subtype":"other"}],"items-per-page":3,"query":{"start-index":0,"search-terms":null}}}