Paradox of Self-Amendment by Peter Suber language, "any regular session," in AC §1. Op.Atty.Gen. No. 65-212 (1965). In short, the amendment to Article 4, §5.B amended AC §1 despite the entrenchment clause in AC §5. But note that there were eight proposed amendments in the even-numbered year of 1970. See Op.Atty.Gen. No. 69-151 (1969-70). Moreover, proposed amendments that would repeal the entrenchment clause were defeated on September 28, 1965, November 3, 1970, and November 2, 1971. For a case holding that parts of AC §1 violated the 14th Amendment of the federal constitution (the one-person, one-vote principle), see State ex. rel. Witt v. State Canvassing Board, 78 N.M. 682, 437 P.2d 143 (1968). For an Attorney General Opinion that the old constitution (particularly its AC) must be followed in making a new constitution, see Op.Atty.Gen. No. 69-105 (1969). For another opinion that a constitutional convention may submit a new constitution and an amendment to the old constitution at the same election, see Op.Atty.Gen. No. 69-118 (1960); see the entries for Georgia and North Carolina for examples. AC §3 provides that if the constitution is amended to allow the people to enact laws directly, then the same limitations will apply to the people that now apply to the legislature. This is the only AC I know of that anticipates future amendments by a conditional provision (but see the conditional nullification of the New Jersey constitution of 1776). Some of the tangles of the New Mexican history of self-amendment are discussed in Section 9.B. New York Current constitution: 1938 AC: Article 19 Prior constitutions: 1894 AC: Article 19 1846 AC: Article 13 1822 AC: Article 8 1777 AC: none AC amended? Yes. AC §1 was amended in 1941, effective January 1, 1942. Comment. New constitutions were rejected by the voters in 1867, 1915, and 1967. Although the 1777 constitution contained no AC, it was once directly amended (October 27, 1801), and of course once indirectly amended. The direct amendment was made by a convention called by an act of the legislature. The current constitution was written in 1894 but widely revised by convention in 1938. North Carolina Current constitution: 1970 AC: Article 13 Prior constitutions: 1875 AC: Article 13 1868 AC: Article 13 1861 AC: Article 13 1776 AC: none AC amended? No. Comment. The 1776 constitution contains no AC, but does contain something like an entrenchment clause for the Declaration of Rights, asserting that the latter "ought never to be violated on any pretence whatever." See comment on Delaware, above. At the same election that ratified the 1970 constitution, six amendments to the 1875 constitution were submitted and ratified. See comments on Georgia, New Mexico, above. North Dakota Current constitution: 1889 (rearranged 1979) AC: Article 15, §202 (1889), AC: Article 4, §45 (1979) Prior constitutions: none AC amended? Yes. Aside from the rearrangement and renumbering of 1979, the AC was amended on November 3, 1914, November 5, 1918, and November 7, 1978. Comment. Article 1, §2 of the North Dakota Bill of Rights declares that the people "have a right to alter or reform [their government] whenever the public good may require." The current AC is unusual in being located in the article on legislative power (after the 1979 rearrangement). Ohio Current constitution: 1851 AC: Article 16 Prior constitutions: 1802 AC: none AC amended? Yes. In 1913, the current AC was added to the 1802 constitution, which had no AC. AC §1 was amended on May 7, 1974. Comment. A new constitution was rejected by the people in 1874. A virtually new constitution was adopted in 1912 when 39 of 42 amendments proposed by a convention were adopted; one of the new amendments was the state's first AC. Prior to 1912 the only section resembling an AC was Article 8, §1 of the 1802 Bill of Rights, asserting that the people have "at all times a complete power to alter, reform, or abolish their government, whenever they deem it necessary." Oklahoma Current constitution: 1907 AC: Article 24 184

The Paradox of Self-Amendment - Page 218 The Paradox of Self-Amendment Page 217 Page 219