Sample Technology Paper on Constitutional Amendment

Constitutional Amendment

Part 1

Is there an amendment that you would like to see passed? Describe the amendment you would like passed, and explain why you believe it is necessary. Do you think your amendment has a good chance of being ratified? Why or why not?

The United State Constitution has survived several attempts aiming to amend it. If the Constitution were to be amended, then I would propose the Article three of the Constitution to be amendment. The Article bestows judicial power in the Supreme Court justices of the United States. At the time the Constitution was promulgated, the executive and the legislature were the most popular arms of the government at the time the judiciary was considered as inferior (Mulvey, 2010). However, this has changed in the modern times.

Apart from placing judicial powers in the Supreme Court justice, the Constitution gives lifetime tenure to the holders. The only rider attached to this Article requires that the holders maintain a good behaviour during their tenure (Mulvey, 2010). This means that the justices can only leave offices in cases of gross behaviour, death, and resignation. The other arms of government have tenure limitations. Therefore, an amendment to the Constitution to provide for a fixed term will suffice for me.

The security of tenure has its own shortcomings: first, the incumbent president nominates a person to the position. The nominated can advance the agenda of the sitting president (Mulvey, 2010). However, in certain cases, a president can finish a term without nominating a judge (for instance, President Jimmy Carter; whereas Richard Nixon chose four). The justices have also advanced the political interest, for instance, limiting abortion in Roe v. Wade (Mulvey, 2010). Thirdly, the nomination is based on unclear considerations; thus, a limitation of tenure would help the country get justices who would never have been chosen.

The proposed amendment has a low chance of success; this can be attributed to the congress whose interest is only to please the public. The strong division and ideological differences between the Republicans and the Democrats would surely derail the process. On the other hand, the amendment can sail through because the losing party would get a chance to nominate if they win in the subsequent elections.

Part 2

Would you support an amendment that outlawed flag burning? How would it read? What are its chances of passing?

The majority opinion in the United States v. Eichman reaffirmed that burning flag although expressive is constitutionally protected right, and the court declared unconstitutional the Flag Protection Act of 1989. The First Amendment protects the personal liberties such as freedom of speech, press, and assembly.

The American flag is the national symbol depicting the past and future aspirations and unity of the American people (Carroll, 2006). The flag is a national heritage and should be protected. Any person who desecrates or burn the flag should be arrested and charged. Therefore, I would support an amendment to prohibit burning of the flag.The amendment would read as follows:

A right or fundamental freedom in the Bill of Rights shall not be limited unreasonably and unjustifiably unless a person desecrates, burns, mutilates, and acts in a way that is disrespectful to the national flag.”

An amendment to the Bill of Rights outlawing the burning of flag would not pass because many Americans do not think these acts upset them (Carroll, 2006). However, the Republican highly regard the American flag and would likely pass such an amendment (Carroll, 2006).



Carroll, J. (2006). Public support for constitutional amendment on flag burning: Amendment appeals more to Republicans than Democrats. Gallup Poll Briefing, 5-8.

Mulvey, J.P. (2010). Supreme fallacy: Why U.S. justices need term limits. Sabiduria, 1(2), pp. 1-13.