User talk:SMP0328./Archive 2019

Adoption vs. ratified
Thank you for your message.

The research I have done actually indicates that it is a three-step process.

Proposal, ratification, adoption.

George Washington brought the letter to congress that on Dec. 15, 1791 that the Virginia Congress's Senate agreed with what their General Assembly had resolved on December 5.

Therefore, according to the Constitution it was law on this date.

However, as the sited pages shows, this was not presented to Congress until December 30. Adoption is "When the Office of the Federal Register (OFR) verifies that it has received the required number of authenticated ratification documents. It drafts a formal proclamation for the Archivist to certify that the amendment is valid and has become part of the Constitution."

The executive branch has no legal document to enforce the amendment on the nonratifying states until the certificate is published along with the amendment. §106b

This of course is a technical step but, as we have, arguable in the courts.

The proper way to construct the sentence would/could be:

It was ratified by the Virginia Legislature on December 15, 1791 into what was later adopted as the Bill of Rights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philfromwaterbury (talk • contribs) 02:09, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for responding. I see your confusion. It is a two-step process, proposing and ratifying. If both steps are met, the proposed amendment immediately becomes part of the Constitution. The certification is simply a confirmation that the proposal was adopted because enough States ratified. The amendment would be part of the Constitution even without the certification, because the Constitution does not require certification. An amendment is adopted when it has been ratified by three-fourth of the States, not when that fact is certified. I hope this makes things clear. SMP0328. (talk) 02:32, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Oops
Didn't mean to come across as snotty (not to you, anyway). I had you mixed up with someone else. Plus I was reading the history backwards -- I thought it had read they for a long time. Go ahead and revert to he and we can start over with a discussion on the talk page. EEng 04:08, 16 May 2019 (UTC)