Understanding the Process for a U.S. Constitutional Amendment (Immigration-Focused Guide)

Changing the U.S. Constitution is intentionally hard. Two proposal routes exist, followed by ratification by the states.

1) Proposal

• Congressional route: An amendment is proposed when two-thirds of both the House and Senate approve identical text. This is how all successful amendments so far began.
• Convention route: If two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) request it, Congress must call a national convention to propose amendments. This path has never produced a ratified amendment, but it remains available.

2) Ratification

• Once proposed, Congress chooses the ratification method:
  • State legislatures: Approval by three-fourths of the states (38), or
  • State conventions: Special one-time conventions in each state (used for the 21st Amendment).
• Congress often sets a deadline in the proposing clause (commonly seven years). If time expires without 38 approvals, the amendment fails.

3) Certification and Publication

• States transmit certified ratifications to the Archivist of the United States, who verifies and proclaims the amendment as part of the Constitution.

Legal guardrails and myths

• The Supreme Court generally does not police politics of ratification beyond clear procedural questions.
• The Constitution protects each state’s equal suffrage in the Senate from being stripped without that state’s consent.
• States’ attempts to rescind ratifications are disputed and historically not recognized once an amendment reaches 38 approvals.

Why this matters for immigration

• Major immigration changes usually occur through statutes, not amendments. However, proposals that would redefine birthright citizenship, alter due process or equal protection, or set national voting eligibility standards would likely require a constitutional amendment.
• Because amendments demand supermajority, bipartisan consensus, durable immigration reforms are more realistically pursued via legislation, administrative policy, and court interpretation—while constitutional change remains a high bar for foundational shifts.

Takeaway: An amendment requires national agreement at extraordinary levels—two-thirds to propose, three-fourths to ratify—ensuring only widely supported, enduring changes reshape our constitutional framework.