Opponents of a Convention of States long argued that there was an unacceptable risk a convention might do too much.  It now appears they were mistaken. So they increasingly argue that amendments cannot do enough.  The “too much” contention was first promulgated in modern times by apologists for the liberal, ultra-activist Earl Warren/Warren Burger Supreme Court.  Specifically, these apologists feared a convention might propose amendments to reverse their favorite judicial decisions.  Their tactic was to claim that an amendments convention, even if legally limited, could turn into a "con-con" that disregarded its limits, repealed the Bill of Rights, and restored slavery.  (Yes, some of them really said that.) The liberals who promoted this scenario must have been amused when some deeply conservative groups fell into the trap and began using the same argument to kill conservative amendments. The "too much" line, however,...(Read Full Article)