Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

Amending the U.S Constitution

To solve the problems within Congress and the law-making procedure, the term limits must be applied to the positions of Congress through Amending the Constitution of the United States. There are specific reasons as to why the amendment is required as a separate law. In the Marbury VS Madison case, Judge Marshal declared that any law which contradicts the present constitution would be considered void, which is rational since all the parties are governed using the constitution (Judicial Review or Judicial Activism? Marbury v. Madison (1803)). So, the term limit law cannot be passed and only amended that which exists within the constitution.

In U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton's case, Arkansas' State Constitution prohibited the participation in the Congress election. This prohibition was for the members who have already served three times in the House of Representatives or two times in the Senate. This prohibition was overruled by the Judge as being inconsistent with the constitution that has already set a standardized eligibility criteria to be followed (U. S. TERM LIMITS, INC., et al., PETITIONERS 93-1456 v. RAY THORNTON et al. WINSTON BRYANT, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ARKANSAS, PETITIONER 93-1828). In this case. Even the Judge declared that the state could not make their amendments, if the changes are needed, the amendments in the constitution of United States has to be done, so there are no contradictions or violations of the existing clauses (U. S. TERM LIMITS, INC., et al., PETITIONERS 93-1456 v. RAY THORNTON et al. WINSTON BRYANT, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ARKANSAS, PETITIONER 93-1828).

Concerning these two cases, amending the U.S. Constitution would be necessary as there are already set criteria for the Representatives and Senates that include their age, citizenship, and inhabitance as the sole criteria for electing the Congress, any new law imposing term limits will be inconsistent with the set criteria. Secondly, to add more qualifications/impositions is not within the power of the State's, which is only responsible for the regulations of elections (U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thorton). These two reasons suggest that amendments through the proper procedure will serve the purpose of what is required.

Canons of constructions are like guidelines that help the court to interpret the language of the statutes, which, even though are not rules, are widely used for understanding and interpreting the language (Brannon, 2018). Based on these, the conditional language will have to be driven to avoid discrepancies within the interpretation. The language of the constitution should be simple and grammatically correct, as interpreted by semantic canons, which focuses on the textual elements of the statutes (Brannon, 2018). Keeping the language ordinary and understandable is essential to make it easier to decode. Grammatical errors, on the other hand, change the context and meaning of the sentences causing misleading interpretations.

Thirdly, the language needs to have exclusivity and clarity, eradicating all the chances of having more than one meaning as interpreted by substantive canon (Brannon, 2018). If there is more than one meaning of the statutes in legal language, than there are chances that meaning might be accepted than the one for which it was initially written (Brannon, 2018). It is essential to keep these three elements in mind, a majority of judges uses these two canons more often to interpret the language of the statutes, increasing the chances of it to be understood well because of its ordinary language, proper sentence construction and, unambiguous and exclusive interpretation.

The right to amend the Constitution of the United States is mentioned within the Constitution as Article V (Constitutional Amendment Process). There are two primary ways in which the constitution can be amended; Congressional Method or Convention Method. The Article V of the United States Constitution, 1787, mentions, "The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate." (Article V and the amendment process). So in a state convention method, the amendment needs the ratification of three-fourths of the state's convention, which is chosen by Congress, while for the congressional method, two-thirds of Congress would be required to ratify it (Article V and the amendment process).

The three branches of government include; federal, Legislative, and Judicial. The federal branch is the leading executive branch, responsible for enforcing the laws which are elected by the people and have a four-year term (Three Branches of Government). The Legislative branch, which is also known as Congress, is responsible for making the laws that are voted and discussed within Congress. It is divided into two parts; Senate and the House of Representatives (Three Branches of Government). The third part of the government, which is judicial, deals with the interpretation of laws as per the constitution (Three Branches of Government). Imposing term limits on Congress will enable more policymaking as fresh people with new ideas will be given a chance (Burgat, 2018). As the law-making process is done by Congress, better laws and policies would reach the executive branch for enforcement while simultaneously detailed interpretation of the amendment in the judicial system would be encouraged.