List of rescissions of Article V Convention applications
Article V lets state legislatures apply to Congress to call a convention to propose constitutional amendments. It is not clear whether a state can revoke a previous application. From 1988 to 2026, at least 30 states rescinded such applications. Between 2008 and 2026, lawmakers in 13 of those states later moved again in favor of having a convention.
What counts as a rescission: These rescissions have been officially received by Congress and noted in the Congressional Record, then referred to the Judiciary Committee. In some cases, it took many years for the rescission to be entered into the record (for example, South Carolina and Virginia in 2004). In 2014, Idaho asked Congress to keep a public, open record of Article V actions.
One-chamber approvals: Over the years, many state legislatures approved only one chamber of a bicameral body for an Article V application. Examples include a 2010 Louisiana effort with ten concurrent resolutions (mostly dying in committee), and known one-chamber approvals in several years: five states in 2011, five in 2012, three in 2013, seven in 2014, sixteen in 2015, ten in 2016, four in 2017, four in 2018, three in 2019, and one in 2020. These are not necessarily final, full applications.
Federal action: The last major federal bill to set rules for an Article V convention was S. 214 in 1991, which did not advance beyond the Judiciary Committee. Since then, Congress has not passed a statute clarifying how an Article V convention would work or who could participate.
State efforts to limit delegates: About 25 states have passed or proposed state laws to limit or regulate delegates from their states if a national convention occurred. Early efforts included Pettis’s 1975 H Con Res 28 and Lent’s 1977 H Con Res 340. In recent years, Representative Arrington introduced House Concurrent Resolutions in 2022, 2023, and 2024, to push for a national convention, but none advanced beyond committees.
Other approaches: Some states explored using interstate compacts to set ground rules for an Article V convention (the so‑called Compact for America, 2013–2016) and North Dakota’s 2013 “management study” proposal (HB 1446) to address concerns about a runaway convention. These efforts did not move forward. Idaho also requested a formal record of applications in 2014.
Conclusion: The topic of rescissions and amendments under Article V is complex and unsettled, with numerous state actions (including rescissions and partial approvals), limited federal action, and ongoing debate about how such a convention would work in practice.
This page was last edited on 2 February 2026, at 07:05 (CET).