Did South Carolina submit constitutional amendment ratification to its governor for a veto?

Plain-English summary

In a March 13, 1973 letter, South Carolina's Attorney General answered five questions about constitutional amendment and convention procedures. He answered “No” when asked whether legislative ratification of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution was submitted to the governor for approval or veto. He said such legislative action generally took statutory enactment form, then described the voting and reading requirements of Article XVI, Section 1 for a state constitutional amendment after voter approval.

The AG said he knew of no South Carolina petition to Congress for a national constitutional convention, so the letter supplied no petition form or vote requirement. He also said no state constitutional conventions had occurred since 1900 and described an article-by-article revision method in use at the time.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1973. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did South Carolina's governor have a veto over legislative ratification of a federal constitutional amendment?
A: The AG's 1973 answer was “No.” The letter did not develop a longer legal analysis of that answer.

Q: What did the letter say about a state constitutional amendment?
A: It quoted Article XVI, Section 1 as requiring a majority of each chamber of the next General Assembly to ratify an amendment after voters approved it, with three readings on separate days in each house.

Q: Did South Carolina have a national convention petition procedure in the letter?
A: The AG said he knew of no South Carolina petition to Congress for a national constitutional convention. He gave no separate answer on the form or voting requirement for such a petition.

Background and statutory framework

New York attorney John D. Feerick asked the state about federal amendment ratification, national convention petitions and state constitutional conventions. The AG's short response distinguished the direct “No” answer on gubernatorial approval from his description of South Carolina's state amendment process and from questions he could not answer from experience.

Citations and references

• Article XVI, Section 1: state constitutional amendment ratification procedure quoted in the 1973 letter.

Official title

On whether any legislative action ratifying an amendment to the U.S. Constitution is submitted to the governor for his approval and/or possible veto and other questions.

Requester

John D. Feerick, Esquire, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, New York.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/march-13-2020-1/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/3-13-John-D-Feerick-02226456xD2C78.pdf

Original opinion text

Office of the Attorney General
State of South Carolina
March 13, 1973
John D. Feerick, Esq.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
919 Third Avenue
New York, New York 10022
Dear Mr. Feerick:
In reply to your letter of February 27, 1973, I advise as follows:

1. Whether legislative action ratifying an amendment to the U. S. Constitution is submitted to your governor for his approval
   and/or possible veto.
   No.
2. What form does such legislative action take (e.g., bill, joint resolution, or concurrent resolution) and what is the required
   vote for such action?
   Generally, action is taken by adoption of a statutory form of enactment. The Constitution (Article XVI, Section 1) requires that, after an amendment has been approved by the voters, ‘if a majority of each branch of the next General Assembly shall—ratify the same amendment by yeas and nays, the same shall become part of the Constitution: Provided, that such amendment shall have been read three times on three several days in each House.’
3. When your state has petitioned Congress for a national constitutional convention, has the legislature's action been submitted
   to your governor for his approval and/or possible veto?
   I am aware of no petition for a national constitutional convention having been submitted.
4. What form has that petition to Congress taken and is there any required vote?
5. Would it be possible for us to obtain the enabling legislation of the constitutional conventions which have occurred in your
   state since 1900?
   None since 1900.
   Current constitutional revision avoided the use of a convention method and avoided a submission to the people of a single constitutional document for approval or disapproval. This procedure was adopted in the light of experiences encountered in such states as New York and Maryland. Revision of the Constitution on an article by article basis was preceded by a constitutional amendment providing: ‘that for the general elections in 1970 and 1972, revision of an entire article or the addition of a new article may be proposed as a single amendment with only one question being required to be submitted to the electors. Such amendment may delete, revise, and interpose provisions from other articles of the Constitution, provided such provisions are germane to the subject matter of the article being revised or being proposed.’ Very truly yours,

Daniel R. McLeod
Attorney General