Amendment of U.S Constitution

Introduction

The U.S. Constitution provides for the possibility of being changed. At the same time, as a guarantee of democracy, this possibility cannot be exercised so easily in this way, since its first formulation, was given the opportunity to introduce amendments (proposed partial change of a law or a bill). To introduce new amendments to the Constitution, that Congress must give way to the procedure with two-thirds of the vote in each chamber (Senate and House of Representatives). A different procedure provides that the legislatures of two thirds of the states of the federation may ask Congress to convene a national convention to introduce new amendments (McAffee, pp. 112).

Discussion

In both cases, the amendments must be approved by the legislatures of three fourths of the states existing before becoming part of the constitution. From a practical standpoint, this system is likely to be rather cumbersome, especially affected by the unequal population of individual states. Some were, in fact, they represent only 4% of the American people, in theory are able to block the amendments desired by the rest of the population.

On how to change the Constitution, usually affects the shape of political and territorial organization of the state. In federal states the order, as a general rule, more complicated, because it more or less involved subjects of the federation or organs that express the interests of these entities. To change the "hard" constitutional rule provides that, in addition to the federal parliament amended the constitution to be adopted by qualified majority of the federal subjects, and sometimes all subjects. An example is the rules established by U.S. law. It is sometimes observed in unitary states, where the upper level of the local authorities granted extensive rights.

Although there are various amendments that need to be changed in the U.S constitution, I will be discussing the amendments regarding the same sex marriage in U.S (Jowell, pp. 26).

Amendments regarding Same Sex marriage

Like the situation in Canada, the U.S. president will face the electorate on this controversial issue of the marriage of same sex. An electorate, we must remember, probably much more conservative than Canada with 66% of the population said to the disadvantage of the recognition of marriage for same sex. But, unlike his vis-à-vis Paul Martin, President Obama can ask the Supreme Court of the United States, through the referral process, to gauge the constitutionality of the issue in order to save time or to satisfy his political allies. This is probably what explains that President Obama has ruled recently in disfavor of the union of same sex. "After more Than Two Centuries of American jurisprudence and Millennia of human experience," said President Obama "some judges and local activists Officials are presuming to change The Most Fundamental institution of civilization" (comments reported by The Economist and Time magazines). Hence his decision to use an amendment to the Constitution of the United States is to expressly prohibit the marriage of same sex.

However, several constitutional scholars are questioning the constitutionality of ...