Apparently this is in dispute.
Here's something that caught my eye:
Quote:
Under Article V of the Constitution, three-fourths of the states -- or 38 states -- are required to ratify constitutional amendments.
|
I don't know why I got it in my head that this was 2/3 instead of 3/4 of states. Honestly, this just makes it even worse - no wonder nothing passes.
To the point, apparently these three senators want the parliamentarian to be the Supreme Court on this one, or to be a legislator and not publish it, which I find to be highly antithetical to democracy, much less ethics or morality.
It's not the parliamentarian's job to decide policy by means of what they do or don't publish, and it's a dangerous and disturbing thought process for these two senators to be using, in my opinion. Then again, this is a party that thinks a coup attempt is okay as long as you affiliate with their party first.
To answer the question, I actually don't know if it's legal or not or if it has passed or not. I'm not that versed in parliamentary procedure. I don't even know for sure who would review it. The SCOTUS determines what the Constitution says, but not which amendments pass or fail - those are sort of what tells the SCOTUS to do, not the other way around.
I'd be curious to learn more, but I'm genuinely not certain on this one. This is interesting and I appreciate you posting it.