Article V states twice that only Congress can hold a Constitutional convention, not the states.


As the United States of America is both federal and national, passage and ratification must involve both Congress and the states. Article V states plainly that any amendment passed at a Constitutional Convention still has to be ratified by the states. This would make it redundant to hold the Convention at the state level. Both passage and ratification would happen at the state level. Neither would happen at the national level. Requiring ratification by the states asserts that only Congress could hold the Convention.


Article V also asserts that Congress would propose the mode of ratification ("as one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress"). The proposal of a mode of ratification is part of the amendment proposal. Since the body that passes the amendment makes the amendment proposal, this says that any Constitutional Convention must be held by Congress . The states can’t hold a Constitutional Convention.

Another assertion in Article V:

A Constitutional Convention can’t vote on anything submitted, only on amendments generated in Convention. Article V requires submitting potential amendments to Congress, which may only vote on them in ordinary session.

Although Article V doesn’t express it, the two-thirds vote required for passage of a single amendment couldn’t logically be reduced for a Constitutional Convention. The difference between debating one topic in ordinary session and holding a Convention is scope: a Convention is unlimited in its power

to remake the Constitution.

It couldn’t require a smaller majority.

Constitutional Convention means the country is in desperate straits requiring total overhaul. It would mean deferring other business. This would be overkill now. We have had multiple amendments in play before without needing a convention.


Valid Amendment

It's never been more important  that every American can separate myths about Article V amendment from facts, not to meditate on them but to defeat actions currently being attempted that rely on misinforming the public about the valid process. Experts disagree on some points but the important aspects aren’t actually in doubt. 

Several potential amendments to the Article V process itself have recently been submitted to Congress. An unnecessary Constitutional Convention is being promoted. A group of state legislatures are even requesting an illegal form of Constitutional Convention - one by the states. 

Amending the Constitution is difficult so that it won’t be used casually.
One reason the political process is slow is to winnow out false information. The following logic and textual analyses are mainstream. That doesn’t mean they’re the only mainstream interpretations. Look into this topic further! We don’t have the luxury of leaving debate to the scholars because these points are being tested right now. Some of the largest issues in play are below. 

The Framers focused on checks and balances, on public participation, on balancing state and federal power – you probably learned all this in school. Now think the way they did. This is one of our most important laws. Why does it say what it says? What it doesn't say is as important as what it does say.

Article V:

"The Congress,
whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary,
shall propose Amendments to this Constitution,
or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the several States,
shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments,
which, in either Case,
shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution,
when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States,
or by Conventions in three-fourths thereof,
as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress;
provided that no State, without its Consent,
shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."

A Constitutional Convention
to correct the compromising effect of money on our government officers
is least promising, and most dangerous,
when money has in fact been compromising some of our officers.

If your state has already applied to Congress for a Constitutional Convention, put a referendum on the ballot to withdraw it (see Using Ballot Initiatives and Statutes). If it’s too late to put it on the ballot or your state doesn’t use them, start a petition to withdraw it. If it’s on the ballot as an initiative in your state, get out the vote against it (See The Con-Con Con and The Final Extremity).

Amendment can’t be done validly by statute or ruling but it’s being done invalidly more and more, sometimes by well-intentioned people who are frustrated with the political process (see Statute vs Constitutional Amendment, and the Tomorrow's Issues in Political Processsubsection).
Even when well meant, these efforts tend to have messy results as well as violating Article V.
Bypassing or relaxing Article V does not benefit the nation. This section supports the valid process by detailing a clause in Article VI that requires government officers to support the Constitution’s text. When they think the text has been amended by a statute or ruling they can use Amendment I’s Grievance clause to apply to Congress on the subject, obliging Congress to debate it publicly; if Congress then decides the text has been invalidly amended they must address it (see Restoring Invalidly Amended Text).

Please gather information about these issues and participate in deciding them. These matters central to our democracy are being tested right now.