A federal judge in Kansas just dropped a bombshell, ruling against a state constitutional rule that’s been holding back legislative power to call for national change.
Just The News reported that on Wednesday, a Kansas federal court overturned a provision requiring a two-thirds supermajority vote in the state legislature to request an Article V convention for proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Let’s rewind to 2023, when the Kansas Senate and House of Representatives took a stand, voting with simple majorities to pass resolutions tied to the Convention of States Action, aiming to propose changes to our nation’s founding document.
Those 2023 votes, though, hit a brick wall—deemed failures because they didn’t hit the lofty two-thirds supermajority mark demanded by the state’s Constitution.
Enter State Sen. Mike Thompson and Kansas Rep. Michael Murphy, who weren’t about to let bureaucratic red tape silence the will of the people, filing a legal challenge to this restrictive supermajority requirement.
Their fight wasn’t just a local skirmish; it was a battle for the broader principle of state power against an overreaching federal machine that too often ignores the heartland.
Fast forward to this week’s ruling, and the court sided with reason, striking down the supermajority barrier as an unnecessary shackle on Kansas lawmakers’ ability to engage in the constitutional process.
Mark Meckler, Co-Founder and President of Convention of States Action, didn’t hold back his enthusiasm, declaring, “This is a great day for everyone who understands how desperately our nation needs the state legislatures to act to rein in D.C.”
Now, let’s unpack that—Meckler’s right to spotlight the urgency of states pushing back against a federal government that’s grown too comfortable overstepping its bounds, though one wonders if D.C. will even notice this wake-up call amid its endless power plays.
Meckler also took a swing at the naysayers, stating, “The decision also puts to bed conspiracy theorists’ claims that the Article V convention process is some big mystery, and that courts can’t intervene when needed.”
Touché—too often, critics of Article V hide behind fearmongering, painting it as a shadowy Pandora’s box, when in reality, this ruling shows the judiciary can and will step in to keep the process grounded.
This decision isn’t just a win for Kansas; it’s a signal to other states that the path to an Article V convention—a mechanism baked into our Constitution for times just like these—doesn’t have to be blocked by outdated state-level hurdles.
For conservatives who’ve long argued that Washington’s unchecked growth needs a hard reset, this ruling feels like a breath of fresh air in a political climate often choked by progressive overreach.
Yet, let’s be fair—opponents of such conventions will likely argue this lowers the bar too much, risking rash amendments, but isn’t the real risk letting a bloated federal system continue unchecked while states sit powerless?
Ultimately, Kansas has lit a spark, reminding us that the Constitution isn’t just a museum piece—it’s a living tool for states to reclaim their rightful role in shaping America’s future, even if it means shaking up a complacent status quo.
