Todd Larason wrote:
Why is this problematic? When the convention was called it was with the express goal of replacing the articles. A tacit a priori admission they were faulty and needed replacement.
But that wasn't the goal, at least not the stated goal. The Convention was called under the procedures specified in the Articles. The Convention itself decided to change the rules for ratification.
If you look at the relevent section of the Articles of Confederation, you will see this is not a problem. The Articles of Confederation Article XIII. Every State shall abide by the determinations of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this Confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every state, and the union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State. The convention, the States, and the current Congress did as was required under Article XIII. -Doug www.TheServerFarm.net