You are not logged in. (Login)

Skip AVC Legislative Progress Report

AVC Legislative Progress Report

FOAVC is now presenting a new AVC Feature. Entitled "Article V Convention Legislative Progress Report" the summation created by Georgia attorney David Guldenschuh shows the progress of various political groups in getting applications submitted through the various state legislatures. The report does not list when applications are posted in the Congressional Record. For that it is suggested those interested check out the applications page of this website for the latest information.

A discussion of the report and the issues regarding these various groups can be found at The report will be updated as new information is submitted to FOAVC by Mr. Guldenschuh. The latest report can be read at: .

People v Natelson: The FEC Showdown

Regulation Vote Signals Fed Decision on Rogue AVC Fiduciary Theory

A decision by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) on a petition to change the regulatory definition of elected federal office to include delegates to an Article V Convention has become the battleground to determine whether an Article V Convention will be an open, freely elected convention or is hijacked by well financed special interests bent on making a convention nothing more than an orchestrated showpiece for their own political agenda. The crux of this argument is the Robert Natelson (master/slave) theory. Read more...

Skip The First Applications of the States

The First Applications of the States

Since the beginning of this nation the states have applied for an Article V Convention at an average rate of one application every four months. The Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that amendment subject has no bearing on the amendment process. The Constitution only specifies one standard for a convention call--an application from each of two-thirds of the state legislatures. You can view the first application submitted by each state at this link. As the evidence proves by 1911 two-thirds of the states had submitted applications for an Article V Convention. The Constitution does not permit nor allow so-called rescissions of the applications. Even if it did, long before a single rescission was submitted (1947 state of Maine to correct a textual error) the states had satisfied the single requirement of the Constitution.

You may also read a summation created by long time convention supporter John Guise showing in sequence of application the state, its date of application, the number of states in the union at the time of the application and the number of states needed to cause a convention call. Accordingly, it can be stated that as of Friday, March 13, 1908 with the application of the state of Washington Congress has been obligated to call an Article V Convention as mandated by the United States Constitution.
Skip Liberty Amendments Miss the "Mark"

Liberty Amendments Miss the "Mark"

In his newly released book, “The Liberty Amendments—Restoring The American Republic” national conservative radio talk show host Mark R. Levin discusses an Article V Convention and offers twelve amendments he believes a convention should propose. To its credit his book has caused a stir of public interest in an Article V Convention. This is no surprise given the fact Americans are totally fed up with the national government and are desperate for a solution—any reasonable solution—so long as it works. Whatever other issues surround Article V, it is irrefutable—amendments work.

Unfortunately, Levin’s book is a perfect example of a golden opportunity deliberately perverted to advance a dangerous political agenda having nothing to do with “his” proposed amendments. Combined with the fact the book is woefully inaccurate, misleading and was obsolete before publication Levin’s book is presently worthless—except for the fact, as already noted, it has greatly raised public awareness about an Article V Convention. Read More...

Skip Congress Sets State Applications As Zero; Passes Law Mandating Delegates Elected

Congress Sets State Applications As Zero; Passes Law Mandating Delegates Elected

In only what can be only described as a kiss off response Kirk Boyle, legal counsel of the House of Representatives responded in a one page letter to Dan Marks' request for an official count of state applications currently recognized by Congress for an Article V Convention call. The sheer volume of applications in question is best appreciated by examination of this map.

Mr. Boyle’s response was succinct—number of applying states counted by Congress: zero.

Mr. Boyle stated Karen Haas, Clerk of the House of Representatives, Read More...
Skip ArticleV.Org Letter To Congress

ArticleV.Org Letter To Congress

At the suggestion of House of Representatives Parliamentarian Tom Wickman, Dan Marks of has sent a letter of inquiry to Karen Haas, Clerk for the United States House of Representatives regarding the official congressional count of applications by the states for a convention call. Read More...
Skip Main Menu

Sibley files Federal AVC Lawsuit against Congress

April 12, 2015--Montgomery Blair Sibley, an attorney based in Maryland, became the second person in United States history to file a federal lawsuit against members of Congress for failure to call an Article V Convention as required by Article V of the United States Constitution with the filing of a federal complaint in Washington, DC. The first person to file this type of lawsuit was the author of this article who filed two cases, Walker v United States in 2000 and Walker v Members of Congress is 2004. The latter suit was appealed to the Supreme Court.

As announced in his blog Sibley filed his suit on April 9, 2015 in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Division. The defendants in the case are Majority leader Mitch McConnell of the United States Senate and John Boehner, Speaker of the House of Representatives. The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment and a writ of mandamus by the court requiring Congress to call an Article V Convention. It requests an advisory jury trial rather than a decision by the court itself. According to Mr. Sibley, the Superior Court was chosen as the court of choice because “it is an Article I federal court where ‘standing” is not a legal bar to the claim.”

In the past the federal government has asserted standing, or lack of the right to sue, as the basis to deny any lawsuit filed requiring Congress to obey the Constitution and call an Article V Convention. However, the latest Supreme Court ruling made in 1939, Coleman v Miller (the basis of the court rulings made in the two Walker lawsuits) states that any court ruling regarding the amendatory process in the Constitution is an “advisory” opinion. Advisory opinions do not require standing on the part of the plaintiff bringing the suit. Moreover the decision clearly states that while Congress has “exclusive” control over the amendment process, nevertheless, it is required to obey the Constitution. Article V gives no option to Congress on calling a convention if the states apply meaning Congress is peremptorily required to call the convention. It has been referred to by the Founders as “peremptory.”

In his complaint Mr. Montgomery lists 35 states which have submitted applications for a convention call. The Constitution mandates a convention call if two thirds of the state legislatures submit applications meaning 34 states must submit applications. Article V only requires applications by the states for a convention call to occur. It does not require submission of the same application from all states nor does it require the applications be for the same amendment subject. In all, 49 states have submitted a total of 766 applications for a convention call. To date, all applications have been ignored by Congress which, until recently, had not even bothered to tabulate the applications for purposes of counting, a necessary step to occur before a call can be issued.

According to court rules, the government has 60 days in which to respond to the complaint.

Congress Begins Tabulation of AVC Applications
UPDATE: March 7, 2015: A letter to House of Representatives Legal Counsel Kirk Boyle demanding publication in the list of applications currently being gathered by the House Judiciary Committee was recently sent by Bill Walker of FOAVC. Publication of applications by the committee have apparently stalled at a count of ten applications. The letter noted per the request of Mr. Boyle in July, 2013, the April, 2013 letter Dan Marks was sent to the House Judiciary Committee. Mr. Walker’s letter pointed out Mr. Marks’ letter contained 42 states applications from 42 states in the form of published Congressional Record. As the records are already a matter of public record there is no basis not to publish them nor can they be referred to as “purported” applications having already been approved and certified as public record. Mr. Walker pointed out for members of the committee to withhold such information is a violation of federal law and gave the committee a deadline by which to either publish the applications in their list or face being reported for violation of federal criminal law.

UPDATE: January 29, 2015: The Clerk of the House of Representatives today published the first state application for an Article V Convention pursuit to the new House Rules passed on January 6, 2015. The application came from the state of Illinois. The House site located at: will list the date of the application and the state. One down, 765 to go. The text of the application can be viewed at: . FOAVC will continue to publish its more complete list for a period of time until it is clear the House has "caught up" on its 238 years obligation of counting applications.

With a quiet addition to House rules on January 6, 2015 the House of Representatives began for the first time in history an official process for tabulation of state applications for an Article V Convention. This historic event went entirely unnoticed by the mainstream media as has been the case for all AVC events leaving one to wonder if the press will even cover a convention when it is called. Under newly enacted House rule Section 3 (c) “Separate Orders Providing for Transparency with Respect to Memorials submitted pursuant to Article V of the Constitution of the United States” the rule, proposed by Congressman Steve Stivers (R-OH) was among several rule changes for the new 114th House of Representative which passed by on a party line vote of 234-172 with all but four Republicans favoring the new House rules. More...

What is Happening to Our Country?

Are you aware that We The People are being denied our constitutional right to an Article V Convention to propose amendments, despite a whopping 750+ (or more) Article V applications from the state legislatures of 49 of all 50 states? Only 34 (i.e. two thirds) are required. So why has Congress ignored the Constitution? We need your help. If you want to help reclaim our constitutional rights, then you have come to the right place.

The significance of the two lists to the left of this column cannot be underestimated. Both lists PROVE that the states have submitted sufficient applications to cause a convention call long before any so-called "rescissions", same subject amendment or any other concept even existed. These "ideas" were created by the John Birch Society beginning in the 1980's. If challenged the JBS cannot provide one official record supporting their claims of "rescissions", "same subject" and so forth. On the other hand FOAVC, if challenged, can provide specific Supreme Court rulings which refute the JBS claims. The public record is irrefutable: as of Friday, March 13, 1908 and since Congress has been obligated to call a convention by the terms of the Constitution. Unless JBS or any other group purporting to prove a convention call is not now mandated can provide proof by use of the text of the Constitution, the sole term specified having been satisfied, a convention is mandated. Thus the proof that Congress has violated the Constitution and its collective oath of offices is now conclusively demonstrated.

  • 700+ Article V Applications... file
  • DISCUSSION Forum... file
  • News about States' Positions on Article V of the Constitution of the United States... Resource
  • P E T I T I O N: Do you support an Article V Convention ? Choice
  • Politicians Supporting Article V of the Constitution of the United States... Resource
  • Pro-Article V Organizations and Web-Sites... file
  • Reference Material by Bill Walker Resource

  • Skip Updates On Current Events

    Updates On Current Events

    As events in several stories on this site are frequently changing links to the latest updated information will be posted here with appropriate titles. Be sure to check this reference each time you visit this site for the latest news on the Article V Convention.

    January 16, 2016:

    Court Dismisses Sibley; Appeal Underway

    December 27, 2015:

    NARA Terminates Article V Convention

    December 8, 2015:

    Sibley Rebuts Gov't; Smith Files Reconsideration

    November 29, 2015:

    Sibley's Olive Branch Letter Spurned

    November 15, 2015:

    Plethora of AVC Activity Marks First Week in November

    October 29, 2015:

    Sibley Files First Papers in Superior Court; Government Seeks Censorship

    October 18, 2015:
    Sibley Wins First Round in AVC Lawsuit

    August 3, 2015:
    Natelson Lays AVC Rules Egg

    July 11, 2015:
    Sibley Files Final Response

    July 4, 2015:
    Filing Fly in Sibley Suit as Court Deadline nears

    June 26, 2015:
    Court Signals Bias in Sibley Lawsuit

    June 21, 2015:
    Flurry of Motions, Responses Marks latest Events in Sibley lawsuit

    June 14, 2015:
    Congress Defies Constitution

    May 31, 2015:
    FOAVC Presents New AVC Feature

    Congress Signals Intent to Disobey Constitution

    May 16, 2015:
    DOJ acknowledges receipt of AG Letter

    Proposed Rules submitted for AVC Applications

    Update: May 10, 2015: In a letter dated April 30, 2015 word was received the petition for updating NARA rules in regards to Article V Applications is now in process. In other news Mr. John Simms, legal counsel to the office of the Inspector General of the NARA indicated they had no idea on how to proceed regarding a request within the petition for an inspection of the records. Mr. Simms suggested a FOIA request be made to the office of Legislative Affairs in NARA but was unsure if this would cause any response from NARA.

    : April 24, 2015: In a brief conversation with NARA Inspector General James Springs, Mr. Springs stated that the request for an inspection of the convention records in the custody of the NARA is being studied by the counsel to the NARA Inspector General's office. Congress recently revised the law regarding inspection of federal records to remove the GSA from the process. The new law is so new even GSA officials were unaware of it until a few weeks ago. The law places inspections of all federal records under the responsibility of the NARA.

    A petition for the commence of rule making activities by the National Records and Archives Administration (NARA) related to the compilation, display and presentation of state Article V applications currently in the custody of the NARA was recently submitted by Bill Walker of Friends of the Article V Convention (FOAVC) to the office of the Federal Register. Submission of the proposed regulations to the Federal Register is the first step in adopting the proposed rules for the NARA.

    In addition, other government officials were sent copies of the petition which is intended to establish a series of federal regulations regarding state applications currently held by the NARA. The government officials were requested to use their offices to facilitate and resolve other problems associated with state applications that lie outside the jurisdiction of the NARA.

    In addition, Mr. Walker sent a proposed convention call to these officials. “In combination,” said Mr. Walker, “the proposed NARA regulations and proposed call emphatically disproves the tired argument that no rules exist regarding a convention or that they cannot be written.” Walker went on to point out that the basis of this call and proposed regulations are supported by numerous Supreme Court rulings as well as numerous federal statutes and regulations. “The fact is that those who say no regulations can be written fail to understand a fundamental point—that in any question regarding the Constitution, all the Constitution must be satisfied and therefore all the Constitution must be applied to any constitutional question,” said Walker.

    Walker stated too often those who have not properly studied the issue of an Article V Convention simply assume because operational issues such as election of delegates, convention agenda and so forth are not mentioned in Article V, that the Constitution simply does not supply any answer about these questions. “This is entirely false,” said Walker. “The courts have repeatedly ruled on many issues regarding the operational aspects of a convention. It simply requires a little bit of digging on the part of the individual to locate the answers. Most people do not this. Therefore they are susceptible to false statements by convention opponents or political groups who rely on this ignorance to further their political agenda.”

    The overall purpose of the proposed regulations is to establish a reliable, verifiable catalogue of state applications available for constitutional use by Congress in calling conventions as well as being available for public review.

    Skip A Letter from Thomas E. Brennan, Former Chief Justice of Michigan

    A Letter from Thomas E. Brennan, Former Chief Justice of Michigan

    Skip The CRS Reports

    The CRS Reports

    On April 11, 2014 the Congressional Research Service published an updated version of its 2012 report on the Article V Convention. The report was the second such report in two months, the first report being published March 7, 2014. Both reports provide the latest details about events occurring in the Article V Convention movement. The April report can be read at:

    The March report can be read at:

    Earlier Reports:
    Do you know your State and Federal politicians' position on Article V of the U.S. ConstitutionAsk them.  See if you can get an answer.  What does the silence about Article V reveal?
    See Steve Ladd's painting of the FOAVC logo...
    Skip Calendar


    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4 5 6
    7 8 9 Today Wednesday, 10 February 10 11 12 13
    14 15 16 17 18 19 20
    21 22 23 24 25 26 27
    28 29      
    Skip FOAVC Stickers

    FOAVC Stickers

    FOAVC Window/Bumper Sticker $4.00 each
    Show your support for Article V
    How to help... How to Help...
    Skip Search Forums

    Search Forums