Coleman v Miller (307 U.S. 433) 1939
The
following quotes are pertinent excerpts from Coleman v. Miller in which the
Supreme Court gave “exclusive”, “sole and complete control over the amending
process” to Congress. Significantly, the Supreme Court referred to the
amendment process as opposed to an amendment proposal
i.e., an amendment proposal originated in Congress and, until voted out of
Congress, entirely within the “control” of Congress. The term
“process” however includes all aspects of Article V. In the Walker lawsuits, the courts extended this
“control” to include the Article V Convention thus rewriting the Constitution
by creating a single amendment process
controlled entirely by Congress. The Constitution does not grant the Supreme
Court the authority to rewrite the Constitution.
* * * * *
"The Constitution grants Congress exclusive
power to control submission of constitutional amendments. ..."
"The Court here treats the
amending process of the Constitution in some respects as a subject to judicial
construction, in others as subject to the final authority of Congress. There is
no disapproval of the conclusion arrived at in Dillon v. Glass, that the
Constitution impliedly requires that a properly submitted amendment must die
unless ratified with a 'reasonable time.' Nor does the Court now disapprove of
its prior assumption of power to make such a pronouncement. And it is not made
clear that only Congress has constitutional power to determine if there is any
such implication in Article V of the Constitution. On the other hand, the
Court's opinion declares that Congress has the exclusive power to decide the
'political questions' of whether a State whose legislature has once acted upon
a proposed amendment may subsequently reverse its position, and whether, in the
circumstances of such a case as this, an amendment is dead because an
'unreasonable' time has elapsed. Such division between the political and judicial branches of the
government is made by Article V which grants power over the amending of the
Constitution to Congress alone. Undivided control of that process has been
given by the Article exclusively and completely to Congress. The process itself
is 'political' in its entirety, from submission until an amendment becomes part
of the Constitution, and is not subject to judicial guidance, control or
inference at any point.
Since Congress has sole and complete control over the amending process,
subject to no judicial review, the views of any court upon this process cannot
be binding upon Congress, and insofar as
Dillon v. Glass, supra, attempts
judicially to impose a limitation upon the right of Congress to determine final
adoption of an amendment, its should be disapproved." ...
Congress, possessing exclusive power over the amending process, cannot
be bound by and is under no duty to accept the pronouncements upon that
exclusive power by this Court...
Neither State nor federal
court can review that power. Therefore, any judicial expression amounting to
more than mere acknowledgment of exclusive Congressional power over the
political process of amendment is a mere admonition to the Congress in the
nature of an advisory opinion, given wholly without constitutional
authority."